LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF 
CALIFORNIA 
•ANTA  CRUZ 


UNION  POETEAITS 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN 


UNION  PORTRAITS 


BY 

GAMALIEL  BRADFORD 


Essay  Index  Reprint  Series 


BOOKS  FOR  LIBRARIES  PRESS 
FREEPORT,  NEW  YORK 


Copyright  1916  by  Gamaliel  Bradford 
Copyright  renewed  1944  by  Helen  F.  Bradford 
Reprinted  1968  by  arrangement  with 
Houghton  Mifflin  Company 


LIBRARY  OF  CONGRESS  CATALOG  CARD  NUMBER: 

68-29194 

PRINTED  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 


£ 


B7S2 


TO 
ELLERY   SEDGWICK 

WITH 
INFINITE    GRATITUDE   FOR 

THE  TWO  GREATEST  KINDNESSES  THAT  CAN  BE  SHOWN 

BY  AN  EDITOR:  GIVING  ADVICE 

WHEN  IT  IS  WANTED,  AND  WITHHOLDING  IT 

WHEN  IT  IS  NOT 


/  don't  believe  the  truth  ever  will  be  known,  and  I  have  a  great 
contempt  for  History. 

GENERAL  MEADE 


/  hate  the  "  Nil  de  mortuis"  etc.  What  do  men  die  for,  except 
that  posterity  may  impartially  judge,  and  get  the  full  benefit  of 
their  example  ? 

SAMUEL  BOWLES 


PREFACE 

THE  use  of  the  word  "portraits,"  as  in  this 
book,  has  been  criticized,  and  with  justice.  It  is 
always  a  mistake  to  transfer  terms  from  one  art 
to  another.  The  portrait-painter  presents  his  sub- 
ject at  a  particular  moment  of  existence,  with  full 
and  complete  individuality  for  that  moment,  but 
with  only  the  most  indirect  suggestion  of  all  the 
varied  and  complicated  stages  of  life  and  charac- 
ter that  have  preceded.  The  object  of  the  psy- 
chographer  is  precisely  the  opposite.  From  the 
complex  of  fleeting  experiences  that  make  up  the 
total  of  man's  or  woman's  life  he  endeavors  to 
extricate  those  permanent  habits  of  thought  and 
action  which  constitute  what  we  call  character, 
and  which,  if  not  unchangeable,  are  usually  modi- 
fied only  by  a  slow  and  gradual  process.  His  aim 
further  is  to  arrange  and  treat  these  habits  or 
qualities  in  such  a  way  as  to  emphasize  their  rela- 
tive importance,  and  to  illustrate  them  by  such 
deeds  and  words,  as,  irrespective  of  chronological 
sequence,  shall  be  most  significant  and  most  im- 
pressive. 

This  is  a  task  in  which  final  and  absolute  results 
are  obviously  impossible  and  even  comparative 
success  is  not  easy.  None  knows  this  better  than  the 


x  PREFACE 

psychographer,  and  his  effort  is  not  so  much  to 
achieve  final  results  as  to  stimulate  readers  to  re- 
flect more  deeply  on  the  curious  and  fascinating 
mystery  of  their  own  and  others'  lives. 

The  best  name  for  the  product  of  the  psychog- 
rapher's  art  is  "psychographs."  But  "portraits" 
has  the  sanction  of  high  authority  and  example, 
while  "psychographs"  is  shocking  to  the  cautious 
imagination  of  a  publisher,  and  would  hardly 
allure  any  but  the  most  adventurous  purchasers. 

In  dealing  with  men  whose  characters  and 
achievements  have  been  the  subject  of  passionate 
controversy,  it  has  naturally  been  impossible  to 
satisfy  every  one.  The  portraits  of  Hooker  and  of 
McClellan  are  those  which,  when  first  published 
in  the  Atlantic  Monthly,  called  forth  the  most 
energetic  protest,  and  in  the  case  of  Hooker  a  good 
deal  of  evidence  has  been  presented,  which  has 
led  me  to  modify  my  judgment  to  a  considerable 
extent.  As  regards  McClellan,  I  have  been  moved 
to  examine  further  a  number  of  works  by  his 
defenders  and  admirers,  notably,  General  Emery 
Upton's  Military  Policy  of  the  United  States,  The 
Life  and  Letters  of  Emery  Upton  by  Peter  S. 
Michie,  and  Antietam  and  the  Maryland  and  Vir- 
ginia Campaigns  by  I.  W.  Heysinger.  I  am  very 
glad  to  call  the  attention  of  readers  to  these  books, 
in  which  it  is  maintained,  with  more  or  less  elab- 
orate argument,  that  if  McClellan  had  not  been 
persistently  thwarted  by  Lincoln,  and  especially  by 


PREFACE  xi 

Stanton,  he  would  have  crushed  the  Rebellion 
and  ended  the  war  two  years  earlier.  The  study 
of  such  writers  has  not,  however,  inclined  me  to 
alter  my  portrait,  which  stands  substantially  as 
it  was  printed  at  first. 

To  express  my  gratitude  individually  to  all  the 
numerous  correspondents  who  have  assisted  me 
with  corrections  and  suggestions  would  be  impos- 
sible. Suffice  it  to  say  that  the  aid  thus  received 
has  been  thoroughly  appreciated. 

GAMALIEL  BRADFORD. 

WELLESLEY  HILLS,  MASSACHUSETTS, 
October  1,  19  IS. 


CONTENTS 

L  GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  .        .       .       1 

McClellan  fortunate  from  the  beginning  —  his  own 
view  of  his  character  —  humility  —  patriotism  —  self- 
satisfaction  —  confidence  in  his  own  organizing  ability 

—  in  his  own  strategy  —  in  his  own  leadership  —  in  his 
own  judgment  as  to  enemy's  numbers  —  in  his  own 
achievements  —  consequent  self-exaltation  —  an  instru- 
ment chosen  by  God  —  considers  a  dictatorship  —  such 
confidence  engenders  hostility  to  others  —  others'  view 
of  McClellan  —  his  defenders  —  his  critics  —  they  do 
not  shake  his  self-confidence  —  accused  of  lack  of  patri- 
otism, most  unjustly  —  his  high  and  fine  qualities  — 
most  marked  among  them  his  power  of  winning  men. 

II.  JOSEPH  HOOKER 33 

Hooker's  appearance  and  early  career  —  origin  of 
name  "Fighting  Joe"  — his  popularity  and  success  in 
first  years  of  war  —  his  fighting  qualities  —  his  defects 

—  greatest,  his  tongue  —  given  command  of  Army  of 
Potomac  —  able  organizer  —  plans  battle  of  Chancel- 
lorsville  ably  —  but  fails  in  execution  —  his  character 
shown  in  that  battle  and  subsequent  conduct  —  relieved 
and  sent  west  —  in  west  able  fighting  at  Lookout  Moun- 
tain and  elsewhere  —  but  does  not  get  along  with  Grant 

—  does  not  get  along  with  Sherman  —  still  the  unfortu- 
nate tongue  —  resigns  because  not  given  McPherson's 
place  —  finishes  war  obscurely  in  west  —  with  all  his 
faults  something  of  the  Homeric  hero  about  him. 

III.  GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE  ....  65 

Meade  less  known  than  other  generals  —  reasons  for 
this  to  be  found  in  his  character  as  revealed  in  his  biog- 
yaphy  —  not  without  ambition  —  or  indifference  to 


xiv  CONTENTS 

neglect  —  other  qualities  that  lead  to  greatness  —  in- 
stinct of  duty  —  and  sacrifice  —  and  patriotism  —  also 
intelligence  of  high  order  —  and  with  intelligence  candor 

—  other  qualities  less  favorable  to  success — some  ami- 
able —  as  modesty  —  and  dislike  of  military  career  — 
other  qualities  less  attractive,  a  marked  inability  to  win 
men  —  and   an  irritable   temper  —  but   these   defects 
really  unimportant  compared  with  noble  traits  —  dig- 
nity,   simplicity,    high-mindedness  —  though    remem- 
bered only  as  victor  of  Gettysburg,  this  glory  enough  for 
any  man. 

IV.  GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  .        ,        .        .97 

Thomas  above  all  interesting  as  a  Southerner  fighting 
for  the  Union  —  analysis  of  possible  reasons  for  doing 
this  —  analysis  of  Thomas's  actual  reasons  —  decides 
finally  in  favor  of  North,  in  spite  of  Southern  sympa- 
thies—  difficulty  of  getting  at  his  political  opinions 
characteristic  —  reserved  in  everything  —  advantages 
of  this  reserve  and  self-control  —  negative  advantages, 
absence  of  brag,  of  criticism  —  positive  advantages,  sys- 
tem, reliability  —  defects,  punctiliousness,  over-sensi- 
tiveness as  to  rank,  a  certain  stolidity  leading  to  slowness 

—  Thomas's  stolidity  partly  superficial  —  underneath 
deep  feeling  both  professional  and  domestic  —  has  edu- 
cated himself  not  to  feel  —  glory  of  Virginia  in  producing 
so  many  heroic  figures. 

V.  WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         .        .  131 

Sherman  contrasted  with  Thomas  in  utter  absence  of 
reserve  —  a  typical  American  —  never  quiet  —  his  di- 
versified youth  —  vividness  of  imagination  —  in  mili- 
tary matters  —  in  general  policy  —  extraordinary  power 
of  expression  —  imagination  guided  by  reason  —  imagi- 
nation makes  him  tolerant  up  to  a  certain  point,  reason 
very  intolerant  beyond  that  —  combination  makes  him 
thoroughly  practical  —  in  military  management  —  in 
handling  men  —  in  short,  American  man  of  business  — 
business  instinct  in  labor,  in  fighting,  in  treatment  of 
enemy — yet  not  mere  machine — all  nerves — in  temper, 
in.  enthusiasm  and  depression,  in  sympathy  —  limita- 


CONTENTS  xv 

tions,  excess  of  purpose,  lack  of  depth,  lack  of  atmosphere 
—  if  a  typical  American,  desirable  that  there  should  be 
more  like  him. 


VI.  EDWIN   McMASTERS  STANTON  .        .        .165 

Problem  with  Stanton,  how  he  could  be  so  disagreeable 
and  so  successful  —  evidence  as  to  disagreeable  qualities, 
ambition,  jealousy,  arbitrariness,  duplicity,  cowardice  — 
manifestation  of  some  of  these-  qualities  in  official  rela- 
tions —  with  subordinates  —  with  Lincoln  —  yet  loved 
Lincoln  —  and  Lincoln  loved  him  —  reasons  for  Lin- 
coln's trust  and  affection  —  Stanton's  sensibility  — 
and  tenderness,  both  domestic  and  official  —  his  labor, 
his  organizing  power,  his  enormous  energy  —  illustra- 
tions of  this  —  his  moral  and  physical  courage  —  his 
sacrifice  —  not  a  thinker,  but  a  doer  —  his  deeds  in- 
spired by  lofty  patriotism. 

VII.  WILLIAM   HENRY   SEWARD        .        .        .197 

Difficulty  with  Seward  reverse  of  that  with  Stanton  — 
so  pleasant  that  you  wonder  if  there  was  anything  more 

—  his  power  of  influencing  men  —  political  manage- 
ment, amiability,  charm,  cheerfulness  —  how  far  sin- 
cere? —  but  another  Seward  than  the  mere  politician  — 
his  earnestness  —  his  labor  —  his  profound  and  passion- 
ate love  of  the  Union  —  various  manifestations  of  this, 
in  State  Department  and  otherwise  —  his  magnificent 
hope  for  America  —  also  differs  from  typical  politician 
in  personal  honesty  and  in  advocating  unpopular  causes 

—  reconciliation  of  two  Sewards  —  the  artist,  in  words, 
in  political  management,  in  humor,  in  vanity,  in  imagi- 
nation —  takes  imaginative  view  of  political  life  and 
history,  as  do  so  few  statesmen. 

VIII.  CHARLES  SUMNER 231 

Sumner  had  a  magnificent  tongue  and  one  idea  — 
some  think  he  had  many  ideas,  because  vast  reader  — 
this  a  mistake  —  nor  had  he  profound  feeling  as  regards 
art,  or  nature,  or  love,  or  death,  or  even  humanity  —  his 
self-absorption  —  grows  in  later  years  —  his  pedantry 


xvi  CONTENTS 

—  with  these  defects  how  explain  vast  popularity?  — 
curiosity,  simplicity,  kindliness,  amiability  even  in  con- 
troversy —  singular  blending  of  these  qualities  in  his 
friendships,  in  his  marriage,  and  in  his  literary  activity 

—  the  man  essentially  a  voice,  delivering  the  message  of 
his  time  on  a  great  moral  question  —  even  his  limitations 
of  political  service,  his  immense  self-confidence,  his  ina- 
bility to  see  more  than  one  side  —  and  the  voice  uttered 
nothing  base  or  unworthy. 

IX.  SAMUEL  BOWLES   .       V     V:       •        •        •  263 

Suitable  to  conclude  with  portrait  of  a  journalist  — 
Bowles  representative  and  of  extreme  interest  because  of 
his  letters  —  his  relation  to  the  Republican  and  life  in  it 

—  the  paper  alive  because  the  man  was  —  his  letters 
among  the  best  written  in  America  —  his  sensitiveness 
and  depth  of  feeling  —  towards  his  family  —  towards 
others  —  his  social  charm  —  his  intelligence  —  not  ab- 
stract —  not  academically  trained  —  but  keen,  vivid, 
practical  —  intensely  nervous  temperament  —  wonder- 
ful control  of  nerves  —  but  abuses  that  control  —  and 
therefore  suffers  in  health,  in  spirits,  and  in  temper  — 
feels  failure  from  ill-health  keenly,  because  of  passion- 
ate desire  to  succeed  and  dominate  —  this  desire  to 
dominate  source  of  greatest  defects,  whim,  waywardness, 
and  even  tendency  to  sacrifice  friendship  to  success  of 
paper  —  yet  withal  one  of  the  best  beloved  of  men. 

NOTES 295 

INDEX  .  319 


ILLUSTRATIONS 

WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN Frontispiece 

GEORGE  BRINTON  MC€LELLAN     .  ....      6 

GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE 88 

CHARLES  SUMNER 244 


UNION  PORTRAITS 

i 
GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Philadelphia,  December  3,  1826. 

Graduated  at  West  Point,  1846. 

Mexican  War,  1846,  1847. 

Taught  at  West  Point  till  1851. 

Visited  the  Crimea  with  Military  Commission,  1855. 

Resigned  from  service,  1857. 

Railroad  management  till  1861. 

Married  Ellen  Mary  Marcy,  May  22,  1860. 

Commanded  in  West,  summer  of  1861. 

Commanded  in  East,  July,  1861,  to  October,  1862. 

Candidate  for  President,  1864. 

Governor  of  New  Jersey,  1878. 

Died,  October  29,  1885. 


UNION  POETEAITS 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN 

I 

GOOD  fortune  seemed  to  wait  on  McClellan's 
early  career.  He  graduated  from  West  Point  in 
1846,  just  at  the  outset  of  the  Mexican  War,  and 
plunged  into  active  service  at  once.  In  Mexico 
every  one  spoke  well  of  him.  He  showed  energy, 
resource,  and  unquestioned  personal  courage.  He 
was  handsome,  thoroughly  martial  in  appearance, 
kindly,  and  popular.  After  his  return  from  Mexico, 
he  taught  at  West  Point,  took  part,  as  an  engineer, 
in  Western  exploration,  then  served  as  one  of  the 
Government's  military  commission  in  the  Crimea, 
and  so  acquired  a  technical  knowledge  much  be- 
yond that  of  the  average  United  States  officer.  In 
the  latter  fifties  he  resigned  from  the  service  and 
went  into  railroading,  which  probably  gave  him 
practical  experience  more  valuable  than  could 
have  been  gained  by  fighting  Indians. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  Civil  War,  in  1861, 
McClellan  seems  to  have  been  generally  looked 
upon  as  a  most  competent  soldier.  He  was  decid- 


4  UNION   PORTRAITS 

edly  successful  in  his  first  campaign  in  Ohio  and 
West  Virginia,  and  when  he  was  called  to  Wash- 
ington to  command  the  Army  of  the  Potomac  it 
appeared  as  if  a  brilliant  and  distinguished  future 
were  before  him. 

In  studying  that  future  and  the  man's  character 
in  relation  to  it,  it  will  be  interesting  to  begin  by 
getting  his  own  view.  This  is  easily  done.  He  was 
one  who  spoke  of  himself  quite  liberally  in  print, 
though  reticent  in  conversation.  In  his  book, 
"McClellan's  Own  Story/'  he  gives  a  minute 
account  of  his  experiences,  and  the  editor  of  the 
book  added  to  the  text  an  extensive  selection  from 
the  general's  intimate  personal  letters  to  his  wife. 
The  letters  are  so  intimate  that,  in  one  aspect,  it 
seems  unfair  to  use  them  as  damaging  evidence. 
It  should  be  pointed  out,  however,  that  while  the 
correspondence  amplifies  our  knowledge  and  gives 
us  admirable  illustration,  it  really  brings  out  no 
qualities  that  are  not  implied  for  the  careful  ob- 
server in  the  text  of  the  book  itself  and  even  in  the 
general's  formal  reports  and  letters. 

What  haunts  me  most,  as  I  read  these  domestic 
outpourings,  is  the  desire  to  know  what  Mrs. 
McClellan  thought  of  them.  Did  she  accept  every- 
thing loyally?  Was  she  like  the  widow  of  the  regi- 
cide Harrison,  of  whom  Pepys  records,  with  one  of 
his  exquisite  touches,  "  It  is  said,  that  he  said  that 
he  was  sure  to  come  shortly  at  the  right  hand  of 
Christ  to  judge  them  that  now  had  judged  him; 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  5 

and  that  his  wife  do  expect  his  coming  again"?  l 
Or  had  Mrs.  McClellan,  in  spite  of  all  affection,  a 
little  critical  devil  that  sometimes  nudged  her  into 
smiling?  I  wonder.  General  Meade  says  she  was  a 
charming  woman.  "Her  manners  are  delightful; 
full  of  life  and  vivacity,  great  affability,  and  very 
ready  in  conversation.  ....  I  came  away  quite 
charmed  with  her  esprit  and  vivacity."  2  Remem- 
ber this,  when  you  read  some  of  the  following 
extracts  and  you  will  wonder  as  I  do. 

But  as  to  the  general,  and  his  view  of  himself. 
He  considered  that  he  was  humble  and  modest, 
and  very  fearful  of  elation  and  vainglory.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  he  was  absolutely  sincere  in 
this,  and  we  must  reconcile  it  with  some  other 
things  as  best  we  can.  How  genuinely  touching  and 
solemn  is  his  account  of  his  parting  with  his  prede- 
cessor, Scott,  whom,  nevertheless,  he  had  treated 
rather  cavalierly.  "I  saw  there  the  end  of  a  long, 
active,  and  ambitious  life,  the  end  of  the  career  of 
the  first  soldier  of  his  nation;  and  it  was  a  feeble 
old  man  scarce  able  to  walk;  hardly  any  one  there 
to  see  him  off  but  his  successor.  Should  I  ever 
become  vainglorious  and  ambitious,  remind  me 
of  that  spectacle.  I  pray  every  night  and  every 
morning  that  I  may  become  neither  vain  nor  am- 
bitious, that  I  may  be  neither  depressed  by  disaster 
nor  elated  by  success,  and  that  I  may  keep  one 
single  object  in  view  —  the  good  of  my  country."  3 

The  self-denying  patriotism  here  suggested  is 


6  UNION   PORTRAITS 

even  more  conspicuous  in  McClellan's  analysis  of 
himself  than  humility  or  modesty,  and  again  no 
one  can  question  that  his  professions  of  such  a 
nature  are  absolutely  sincere.  However  one  may 
criticize  the  celebrated  letter  of  advice  written  to 
Lincoln  from  Harrison's  Landing,  it  is  impossible 
to  resist  the  impetuous  solemnity  of  its  closing 
words.  "In  carrying  out  any  system  of  policy 
which  you  may  form  you  will  require  a  Comman- 
der-in-Chief  of  the  Army  —  one  who  possesses 
your  confidence,  understands  your  views,  and  who 
is  competent  to  execute  your  orders  by  directing 
the  military  forces  of  the  nation  to  the  accomplish- 
ment of  the  objects  by  you  proposed.  I  do  not  ask 
that  place  for  myself.  I  am  willing  to  serve  you  in 
such  position  as  you  may  assign  me,  and  I  will  do 
so  as  faithfully  as  ever  subordinate  served  superior. 
I  may  be  on  the  brink  of  eternity,  and  as  I  hope 
forgiveness  from  my  Maker  I  have  written  this 
letter  with  sincerity  toward  you  and  from  love  for 
my  country."  4 

It  is  necessary  to  bear  these  passages  —  and 
there  are  many  similar  ones  —  in  mind,  as  we 
progress  with  McClellan;  for  the  leadership  of  one 
of  the  most  splendid  armies  in  the  world  through 
the  great  campaigns  of  the  Peninsula  and  Antie- 
tam  fostered  a  temper  that  often  seems  incompat- 
ible with  modesty  and  sometimes  even  with  pa- 
triotism. We  must  remember  that  he  found  the 
whole  country  looking  to  him  with  enthusiasm. 


GEORGE  BRINTON   McCLELLAN 


GEORGE   BRINTON   McCLELLAN  7 

We  must  remember  that  he  was  surrounded  —  to 
some  extent  he  surrounded  himself  —  with  men 
who  petted,  praised,  and  flattered  him.  We  must 
remember  that  in  the  war,  from  the  first,  he  never 
had  the  wholesome  discipline  of  a  subordinate 
position,  but  was  one  of  the  few  generals  who  began 
by  commanding  an  independent  army.  We  must 
remember  especially  the  fortunate  —  or  unfortu- 
nate —  circumstances  of  his  earlier  life.  As  Colonel 
McClure  says,  he  would  have  been  a  different  man, 
"had  he  been  a  barefoot  alley  boy,  trained  to  tag 
and  marbles  and  jostling  his  way  in  the  world/'  5 

The  explanation  of  many  things  is  well  given  by 
a  passage  in  one  of  his  earlier  letters.  "I  never 
went  through  such  a  scene  in  my  life,  and  never 
expect  to  go  through  such  another  one.  You  would 
have  been  surprised  at  the  excitement.  At  Chilli- 
cothe  the  ladies  had  prepared  a  dinner,  and  I  had 
to  be  trotted  through.  They  gave  me  about 
twenty  beautiful  bouquets  and  almost  killed  me 
with  kindness.  The  trouble  will  be  to  fill  their 
expectations,  they  seem  to  be  so  high.  I  could  hear 
them  say,  '  He  is  our  own  general ' ;  '  Look  at  him, 
how  young  he  is';  'He  will  thrash  them';  'He'll 
do,'  etc.,  etc.,  ad  infinitum."  6 

Doubtless  there  are  cool  and  critical  heads  that 
can  stand  this  sort  of  thing  without  being  turned, 
but  McClellan's  was  not  one  of  them.  Even  in  his 
Mexican  youth  a  certain  satisfaction  with  his  own 
achievements  and  capacity  can  be  detected  in  his 


8  UNION   PORTRAITS 

letters.  "  I  Ve  enough  to  do  to  occupy  half  a  dozen 
persons  for  a  while;  but  I  rather  think  I  can  get 
through  it."7  In  the  full  sunshine  of  glory  this 
satisfaction  rose  to  a  pitch  which  sometimes  seems 
abnormal. 

Let  us  survey  its  different  manifestations.  As 
the  organizer  of  an  army,  it  is  generally  admitted 
that  McClellan  had  few  superiors.  He  took  the 
disorderly  mob  which  fled  from  the  first  Bull  Run 
and  made  it  the  superb  military  instrument  that 
broke  Lee's  prestige  at  Gettysburg  and  finally 
strangled  the  Confederacy.  In  achieving  this,  his 
European  studies  must  have  been  of  great  help  to 
him,  as  setting  an  ideal  of  full  equipment  and  fin- 
ished discipline.  Some  think  his  ideal  was  too  ex- 
acting and  involved  unnecessary  delay.  He  himself 
denies  this  and  disclaims  any  desire  for  an  impos- 
sible perfection. 8  At  any  rate,  praise  from  others 
as  to  his  organizing  faculty  would  be  disputed  by 
few  or  none.  Yet  even  on  this  point  one  would 
prefer  to  hear  others  praise  and  not  the  man  him- 
self. "I  do  not  know  who  could  have  organized 
the  Army  of  the  Potomac  as  I  did."9  It  has  a 
strange  sound.  And  this  is  not  a  private  letter,  but 
a  sentence  deliberately  penned  for  posterity. 

And  how  did  he  judge  himself  in  other  lines 
of  military  achievement?  What  was  McClellan's 
opinion  of  McClellan  as  a  strategist  and  thinker? 
From  the  beginning  of  the  war  he  was  ever  fertile 
in  plans,  which,  as  he  asserted,  would  assure  speedy 


GEORGE  BRINTON   McCLELLAN  9 

success  and  the  downfall  of  the  Confederacy,  plans 
involving  not  only  military  movements  but  the 
conduct  of  politics.  He  sent  these  plans  to  Scott 
in  the  early  days,  and  was  snubbed.  Later  he  sub- 
mitted them  to  Lincoln  and  the  last  was  snubbed 
—  by  silence  —  even  more  severely  than  the  first 
had  been.  McClellan  worked  out  these  plans  in 
loving  and  minute  detail.  Every  contingency  was 
foreseen  and  every  possible  need  in  men,  supplies, 
and  munitions  was  figured  on.  As  a  consequence, 
the  needs  could  never  be  filled  —  and  the  plans 
never  be  executed.  The  very  boldness  and  grasp  of 
the  conception  made  the  execution  limited  and 
feeble.  And  the  plans  were  so  exquisitely  complete 
that  in  this  stumbling  world  they  could  never  be 
put  into  practical  effect.  I  have  met  such  men. 
And  so  have  you. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  fact  that  McClellan's 
plans  were  never  realized  left  them  all  the  more 
attractive  in  their  ideal  beauty.  "  Had  the  Army 
of  the  Potomac  been  permitted  to  remain  on  the 
line  of  the  James,  I  would  have  crossed  to  the 
south  bank  of  that  river,  and  while  engaging  Lee's 
attention  in  front  of  Malvern,  would  have  made  a 
rapid  movement  in  force  on  Petersburg,  having 
gained  which,  I  would  have  operated  against 
Richmond  and  its  communications  from  the  west, 
having  already  gained  those  from  the  south/'  10 
Oh,  the  charm  of  that  "would  have,"  which  no 
man  can  absolutely  gainsay!  Or  take  a  more  gen- 


10  UNION   PORTRAITS 

eral  and  even  more  significant  passage:  "Had  the 
measures  recommended  been  carried  into  effect  the 
war  would  have  been  closed,  in  less  than  one  half 
the  time  and  with  infinite  saving  of  blood  and 
treasure/'  n  What  salve  is  in  "would  have"  for  an 
aching  memory  and  a  wounded  pride!  And  there 
is  comfort,  also,  in  repeating  to  one's  self  —  and 
others  —  the  acknowledgment  of  courteous  ene- 
mies "that  they  feared  me  more  than  any  of  the 
Northern  generals,  and  that  I  had  struck  them 
harder  blows  when  in  the  full  prime  of  their 
strength."  12 

Well,  a  general  should  be  a  leader  as  well  as  a 
thinker,  should  not  only  plan  battles  but  inspire 
them.  How  was  it  with  McClellan  in  this  regard? 
Some  of  those  who  fought  under  him  have  fault  to 
find.  Without  the  slightest  question  of  their  com- 
mander's personal  courage,  they  think  that  he 
was  too  absorbed  in  remote  considerations  to 
throw  himself  with  passion  into  direct  conflict. 
"He  was  the  most  extraordinary  man  I  ever  saw," 
says  Heintzelman,  who  was,  to  be  sure,  not  one  of 
the  general's  best  friends.  "I  do  not  see  how  any 
man  could  leave  so  much  to  others  and  be  so  con- 
fident that  everything  would  go  just  right."  13 
With  which,  however,  should  be  compared  Lee's 
remark:  'I  think  and  work  with  all  my  power  to 
bring  the  troops  to  the  right  place  at  the  right 
time,  then  I  have  done  my  duty.  As  soon  as  I 
order  them  forward  into  battle,  I  leave  xny  army 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  11 

in  the  hands  of  God/'  14  But  McClellan  himself 
had  no  doubts  about  his  leadership.  There  can  be 
no  question  but  that  his  grandiloquent  proclama- 
tions at  the  beginning  of  the  war  spoke  his  whole 
heart,  which  was  not  much  changed  later  on. 
"Soldiers!  I  have  heard  that  there  was  danger 
here.  I  have  come  to  place  myself  at  your  head 
and  to  share  it  with  you.  I  fear  now  but  one  thing 
—  that  you  will  not  find  f oeman  worthy  of  your 
steel.  I  know  that  I  can  rely  upon  you."  15 

In  his  belief  that  he  had  the  full  confidence  of 
his  men  McClellan  has  the  world  with  him.  They 
loved  him  and  he  loved  them.  One  of  the  most 
charming  things  about  him  is  his  deep  interest  in 
the  welfare  of  his  soldiers,  his  sympathy  with  their 
struggles  and  their  difficulties,  though  some  think 
he  carried  this  so  far  as  to  spare  them  in  a  fashion 
not  really  merciful  in  the  end.  When  he  is  tem- 
porarily deprived  of  command  and  his  army  is 
fighting,  he  begs  passionately  to  be  allowed  at 
least  to  die  with  them.  When  he  is  restored  to 
them,  he  portrays  their  enthusiastic  delight  in 
perhaps  the  most  curious  of  many  passages  of  this 
nature.  "As  soon  as  I  came  to  them  the  poor 
fellows  broke  through  all  restraints,  rushed  from 
the  ranks  and  crowded  around  me,  shouting,  yell- 
ing, shedding  tears,  thanking  God  that  they  were 
with  me  again,  and  begging  me  to  lead  them  back 
to  battle.  It  was  a  wonderful  scene,  and  proved 
that  I  had  the  hearts  of  these  men."  16 


12  UNION   PORTRAITS 

The  most  singular  instance  of  McClellan's  exces- 
sive reliance  on  his  own  judgment  is  his  perpetual, 
haunting,  unalterable  belief  that  the  enemy  were 
far  superior  to  him  in  number.  No  evidence,  no 
argument,  no  representation  from  subordinates 
or  outsiders  could  shake  him  in  this  opinion.17 
Send  more  men,  more  men,  more  men,  the  rebels 
outnumber  me,  was  his  increasing  cry.  The  curious 
force  of  this  prepossession,  as  well  as  the  man's 
characteristic  ingenuity,  show  in  his  reply  to  Lin- 
coln's suggestion  that  as  Lee  had  sent  away  troops, 
it  must  be  a  good  time  to  attack.  Oh,  says  McClel- 
lan,  in  effect,  can't  you  see  that  if  he  has  troops  to 
spare,  his  numbers  must  be  too  prodigious  for  me 
to  cope  with? 

This  delusion  as  to  numbers  naturally  made  neg- 
ative success  seem  triumph,  and  magnified  great 
things  into  even  greater.  Thus,  the  general  writes 
during  Antietam:  "We  are  in  the  midst  of  the 
most  terrible  battle  of  the  war  —  perhaps  of  his- 
tory. Thus  far  it  looks  well,  but  I  have  great 
odds  against  me."  18  In  reality  Lee's  force  was  less 
than  McClellan's. 

All  of  the  general's  really  great  achievements  are 
thus  made  much  of,  until  impatient  critics  are 
strongly  inclined  to  depreciate  them.  He  an- 
nounced that  he  had  "secured  solidly  for  the 
Union  that  part  of  West  Virginia  north  of  the 
Kanawha  and  west  of  the  mountains."  19  No 
doubt,  he  had;  but  —  Of  the  battle  of  Malvern 


GEORGE  BRINTON   McCLELLAN  13 

Hill  he  says:  "I  doubt  whether,  in  the  annals  of 
war,  there  was  ever  a  more  persistent  and  gallant 
attack,  or  a  more  cool  and  effective  resistance."  20 
And  again:  "I  have  every  reason  to  believe  that 
our  victory  at  Malvern  Hill  was  a  crushing  one  — 
one  from  which  he  [the  enemy]  will  not  readily 
recover/' 21  The  last  words* McClellan  wrote  were 
a  laudation  of  the  Army  of  the  Potomac  —  and  its 
commander  —  in  reference  to  the  retreat  from  the 
Peninsula:  "It  was  one  of  those  magnificent  epi- 
sodes which  dignify  a  nation's  history,  and  are  fit 
subjects  for  the  grandest  efforts  of  the  poet  and 
the  painter."  22  Hooker  —  of  course  a  somewhat 
prejudiced  witness  —  says  of  the  same  event:  "It 
was  like  the  retreat  of  a  whipped  army.  We  re- 
treated like  a  parcel  of  sheep;  everybody  on  the 
road  at  the  same  time;  and  a  few  shots  from  the 
rebels  would  have  panic-stricken  the  whole  com- 
mand." 23  Finally,  of  his  last  battle,  Antietam,  the 
general  says:  "Those  in  whose  judgment  I  rely  tell 
me  that  I  fought  the  battle  splendidly  and  that 
it  was  a  masterpiece  of  art."  24 

I  ask  myself  how  the  witty  and  vivacious  woman 
who  charmed  Meade  received  such  words  as  these. 
Did  that  little  critical  devil  nudge  her,  or  did  she 
loyally  "expect  his  coming  again"? 


14  UNION   PORTRAITS 

II 

A  commander  who  took  this  view  of  what  he 
had  accomplished  almost  necessarily  developed  an 
extraordinary  sense  of  his  importance  to  the  cause 
and  to  the  country.  McClellan  was  important. 
We  should  never  forget  it.  Only  perhaps  no  one 
was  so  important  as  he  deemed  himself  to  be.  His 
deep  sense  of  responsibility  is  delightfully  blended 
with  other  marked  elements  of  his  character  in  a 
brief  telegram  to  Lincoln,  shortly  before  Antietam: 
"  I  have  a  difficult  task  to  perform,  but  with  God's 
blessing  will  accomplish  it.  ...  My  respects  to  Mrs. 
Lincoln.  Received  most  enthusiastically  by  the 
ladies.  Will  send  you  trophies."  25  Over  and  over 
again  he  repeats  that  he  has  saved  the  country. 
"Who  would  have  thought,  when  we  were  married, 
that  I  should  so  soon  be  called  upon  to  save  my 
country?"  26  "I  feel  some  little  pride  in  having, 
with  a  beaten  and  demoralized  army,  defeated 
Lee  so  utterly  and  saved  the  North  so  com- 
pletely." 27  And  in  the  solemn  preface  to  his  book 
he  proclaims  to  an  expectant  world:  "Twice,  at 
least,  I  saved  the  capital,  once  created  and  once 
reorganized  a  great  army."  28 

The  most  striking  example  of  this  self -exaltation, 
amounting  nearly  to  mania,  is  the  letter  written  to 
Burnside,  in  May,  1862:  "The  Government  have 
deliberately  placed  me  in  this  position.  If  I  win, 
the  greater  the  glory.  If  I  lose,  they  will  be  damned 


GEORGE  BRINTON   McCLELLAN  15 

forever,  both  by  God  and  men."  29  And  the  tone 
in  which  he  continues  shows  that  his  situation  had 
taken  hold  of  him  with  an  approach  to  religious 
ecstasy: "  I  sometimes  think  now  that  I  can  almost 
realize  that  Mahomet  was  sincere.  When  I  see  the 
hand  of  God  guarding  one  so  weak  as  myself,  I  can 
almost  think  myself  a  chosen  instrument  to  carry 
out  his  schemes.  Would  that  a  better  man  had 
been  selected."  30 

It  is  no  wonder  that  the  bee  of  dictatorship 
buzzed  in  a  brain  so  feverishly  overwrought. 
That  the  idea  entered  and  was  considered,  if  not 
entertained,  there  can  be  no  question.  Flatterers 
urged  it,  and  circumstances,  viewed  as  McClellan 
viewed  them,  seemed  to  Suggest  it.  "The  order 
depriving  me  of  the  command  created  an  im- 
mense deal  of  deep  feeling  in  the  army  —  so  much 
so  that  many  were  in  favor  of  my  refusing  to 
obey  the  order,  and  of  marching  upon  Washington 
to  take  possession  of  the  government."  31  The 
general  is  even  said  to  have  remarked  to  one  very 
near  him,  "How  these  brave  fellows  love  me,  and 
what  a  power  their  love  places  in  my  hands!  What 
is  there  to  prevent  my  taking  the  government  in 
my  own  hands?"  32 

The  man's  fund  of  native  common  sense  was 
there  to  prevent  it.  But  it  is  evident  that  he  lov- 
ingly considered  the  possibility.  Only,  we  must 
remember  that  such  consideration  was  not 
prompted  by  personal  motives,  but  by  a  genuine 


16  UNION  PORTRAITS 

patriotism.  He  says  so  and  we  must  believe  him. 
If  no  one  else  but  him  could  save  the  country,  it 
was  his  duty  to  save  it.  "I  receive  letter  after 
letter,  have  conversation  after  conversation,  call- 
ing on  me  to  save  the  nation,  alluding  to  the  presi- 
dency, dictatorship,  etc.  As  I  hope  one  day  to  be 
united  with  you  forever  in  heaven,  I  have  no  such 
aspiration.  I  would  cheerfully  take  the  dictator- 
ship and  agree  to  lay  down  my  life  when  the  coun- 
try is  saved/'  33 

All  this  time  there  was  a  government  in  Wash- 
ington —  existing  chiefly  to  annoy  him,  so  McClel- 
lan  thought.  The  worst  effect  of  the  general's 
serene  —  or  perturbed  —  self-confidence  was  that 
it  bred  an  entire  disbelief  in  the  judgment  of 
others.  He  was  impatient  with  his  subordinates 
when  they  differed  from  him,  did  not  seek  their 
advice  or  trust  their  ability.  "  In  Heaven's  name 
give  me  some  general  officers  who  understand  their 
profession,"  he  writes  in  the  early  days.34  With  his 
superiors  —  his  few  superiors,  Halleck,  Stanton, 
Lincoln  —  and  with  the  Government  they  repre- 
sented, he  endeavored  to  be  civil,  but  he  felt  that 
they  knew  nothing  about  war,  and  where  they 
could  not  be  coaxed,  they  must  be  disciplined. 
Among  Lincoln's  many  difficulties  none,  perhaps, 
were  greater  than  those  with  McClellan.  The 
President  argued  patiently,  remonstrated  gently, 
reproved  paternally,  submitted  to  neglect  that 
resembled  impertinence,  kicked  his  heels  like  a 


GEORGE  BRINTON   McCLELLAN          17 

messenger  boy  in  the  general's  waiting-room,  and 
declared,  with  his  divine  self-abnegation,  that  he 
would  hold  McClellan's  horse  if  that  would  help 
win  victory.  In  return,  the  general  patronized  his 
titular  commander-in-chief  when  things  went  well, 
satirized  him  when  they  went  doubtfully,  —  "I 
do  not  yet  know  what  are  the  military  plans  of  the 
gigantic  intellects  at  the  head  of  the  govern- 
ment," 35  —  and  when  they  went  ill,  uttered 
unequivocal  condemnation.  "It  is  the  most  in- 
famous thing  that  history  has  recorded."  86 

Ropes's  analysis  of  McClellan's  attitude  in  this 
connection  is  so  penetrating  and  so  suggestive  that 
I  cannot  pass  it  by:  "There  are  men  so  peculiarly 
constituted  that  when  they  have  once  set  their 
hearts  on  any  project,  they  cannot  bear  to  consider 
the  facts  that  militate  against  their  carrying  it  out; 
they  are  impatient  and  intolerant  of  them;  such 
facts  either  completely  fall  out  of  their  minds,  so  to 
speak,  as  if  they  had  never  been  heard  of,  or,  if 
they  subsequently  make  themselves  felt,  they  seem 
to  men  of  this  temper  to  have  assumed  an  inimical 
aspect,  and,  what  is  worse,  inasmuch  as  it  is  impos- 
sible for  any  man  to  get  angry  with  facts,  such  men 
instinctively  fix  upon  certain  individuals  whom 
they  associate  in  some  way,  more  or  less  remote, 
with  these  unwelcome  facts,  and  whom  they  al- 
ways accuse,  in  their  own  thought,  at  least,  of 
hostility  or  deception.  Such  a  mind  we  conceive  to 
have  been  that  of  General  McClellan/' 37 


18  UNION  PORTRAITS 

It  is  only  thus  that  we  can  explain  the  extreme 
bitterness  of  a  nature  otherwise  kindly  and  gener- 
ous. The  perturbed  and  anxious  spirit  saw  enemies 
everywhere,  magnified  real  hostility  and  imagined 
hostility  where  there  was  none.  Political  opposi- 
tion becomes  malignant  hatred.  "You  have  no 
idea  of  the  undying  hate  with  which  they  [the 
Abolitionists]  pursue  me;  but  I  take  no  notice  of 
them."  38  Anger  with  Halleck  and  Stanton  was 
perhaps  natural.  Many  men  got  angry  with  Hal- 
leck and  Stanton.  It  is  not  the  place  to  judge 
either  of  them  here;  but  it  will  be  generally  ad- 
mitted that  their  different  ways  of  dealing  with 
subordinates  were  not  such  as  to  inspire  a  happy 
frame  of  mind.  Certainly  they  did  not  in  McClel- 
lan.  Yet  it  may  be  questioned  whether  either 
Stanton  or  Halleck  considered  the  general  an 
object  of  personal  spite  or  quite  deserved  the  fierce 
abuse  which  he  showered  upon  them  freely.  "Of 
all  the  men  whom  I  have  encountered  in  high 
position  Halleck  was  the  most  hopelessly  stupid. 
It  was  more  difficult  to  get  an  idea  through  his 
head  than  can  be  conceived  by  any  one  who  never 
made  the  attempt."  39  And  to  Stanton,  "who 
would  say  one  thing  to  a  man's  face  and  just  the 
reverse  behind  his  back/'  40  was  addressed  one 
of  the  most  impertinent  sentences  ever  written 
by  a  soldier  to  his  military  superior:  "If  I  save 
this  army  now,  I  tell  you  plainly  that  I  owe  no 
thanks  to  you  or  to  any  other  persons  in  Wash- 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  19 

ington.  You  have  done  your  best  to  sacrifice  this 
army."  41 

But  the  same  bitterness  was  manifested  toward 
men  much  less  deserving  of  it  than  Halleck  or 
Stanton.  Few  of  the  Northern  generals  were  more 
hardly  used  by  fortune  than  McDowell,  and  im- 
partial judges  declare  him  to  have  been  a  soldier 
and  a  gentleman.  McClellan  tries  to  treat  him 
well,  but  finds  it  hopeless.  "  He  never  appreciated 
my  motives,  and  felt  no  gratitude  for  my  forbear- 
ance and  kindness.  ...  I  have  long  been  convinced 
that  he  intrigued  against  me  to  the  utmost  of  his 
power."  42  Burnside,  again,  was  McClellan's  de- 
voted friend  and  admirer,  but,  from  some  cause  or 
other,  he  failed  to  carry  out  his  leader's  plans  at 
Antietam,  and,  much  against  his  will,  he  allowed 
himself  to  be  forced  into  McClellan's  place.  This 
is  what  he  gets  for  it:  "I  cannot,  from  my  long 
acquaintance  with  Burnside,  believe  that  he  would 
deliberately  lie,  but  I  think  that  his  weak  mind 
was  turned;  that  he  was  confused  in  action;  and 
that  subsequently  he  really  did  not  know  what  had 
occurred  and  was  talked  by  his  staff  into  any  belief 
they  chose."  43 

To  such  an  extent  can  a  sturdy  confidence  in  self 
poison  minds  of  really  noble  and  magnanimous 
strain. 


20  UNION   PORTRAITS 

III 

So  we  have  examined  carefully  McClellan's  own 
judgment  on  his  own  career  and  achievements. 
Now  let  us  see  what  others  thought  of  them.  If  the 
discrepancy  at  times  is  startling  we  can  remember 
the  remark  of  Lee  to  a  subordinate  who  was  try- 
ing to  draw  him  out  about  another  subordinate: 

"Well,  sir,  if  that  is  your  opinion  of  General , 

I  can  only  say  that  you  differ  very  widely  from  the 
general  himself." 

Not  all  critics  agree  in  their  judgment,  however, 
in  this,  any  more  than  in  other  cases.  McClellan 
has  many  admirers  who  speak  almost  as  enthusi- 
astically of  what  he  did  and  what  he  might  have 
done  as  he  could.  The  less  discreet  are  not,  perhaps, 
always  fortunate  in  their  commendation,  exoner- 
ating their  favorite  at  the  expense  of  others  who 
did  not,  as  most  of  us  believe,  deserve  abuse.  Thus 
George  Ticknor  Curtis  asserts:  "From  the  Pres- 
ident down,  through  the  various  ranks  of  poli- 
ticians or  soldiers  by  whom  he  was  surrounded,  all 
knew  in  their  hearts  that  the  only  reason  why 
McClellan  had  failed  to  reach  Richmond,  and  been 
obliged  to  execute  his  flank  movement  to  the 
James,  was  because  McDowell  had  been  arrested 
by  express  orders  from  Washington  on  his  march 
to  effect  a  junction  with  McClellan's  right."  44 
And  Hillard  declares  that  "General  McClellan's 
communications  to  the  President  were  generally  in 


GEORGE  BRINTON   McCLELLAN  21 

reply  to  inquiries  or  suggestions  from  the  latter, 
whose  restless  and  meddlesome  spirit  was  con- 
stantly moving  him  to  ask  questions,  obtrude 
advice,  and  make  comments  upon  military  mat- 
ters, which  were  as  much  out  of  his  sphere  as  they 
were  beyond  his  comprehension." 45 

But  McClellan  has  defenders  of  more  weight. 
The  Comte  de  Paris,  influenced  no  doubt  partly 
by  social  relations,  but  clear-sighted  in  all  his 
judgments,  holds  decidedly  that  his  friend  would 
have  achieved  far  more  if  the  Government  had  not 
thwarted  him.  Lee,  a  generous  adversary,  de- 
clared with  emphasis  that  McClellan  was  the  best 
of  the  generals  to  whom  he  was  opposed,46  and  an 
impartial  judge  of  the  highest  standing,  Moltke, 
is  said  to  have  remarked  that  if  the  American 
commander  had  been  supported  as  he  should  have 
been,  the  war  would  have  ended  two  years  sooner 
than  it  did.47  Best  of  all  friendly  judgments  are  the 
sober  and  discriminating  words  of  Grant:  "It  has 
always  seemed  to  me  that  the  critics  of  McClellan 
do  not  consider  this  vast  and  cruel  responsibility  — 
the  war  a  new  thing  to  all  of  us,  the  army  new, 
everything  to  do  from  the  outset,  with  a  restless 
people  and  Congress.  McClellan  was  a  young  man 
when  this  devolved  upon  him,  and  if  he  did  not 
succeed,  it  was  because  the  conditions  of  success 
were  so  trying.  If  McClellan  had  gone  into  the  war 
as  Sherman,  Thomas,  or  Meade,  had  fought  his 
way  along  and  up,  I  have  no  reason  to  suppose 


22  UNION  PORTRAITS 

that  he  would  not  have  won  as  high  distinction  as 
any  of  us."  48 

Even  those  who  are  inclined  to  find  fault,  find 
much  to  praise.  As  to  the  general's  organizing 
faculty  there  is  but  one  verdict.  Only  genius  of  the 
highest  order  in  this  line  could  have  made  the 
Army  of  the  Potomac  the  magnificent  instrument 
which  others  were  afterwards  to  use  so  effectively. 
Further,  both  Ropes  and  Henderson,  though  feel- 
ing that  McClellan  did  not  accomplish  all  that  he 
should  have  done  with  the  means  at  his  disposal, 
are  inclined  to  agree  with  him  in  the  belief  that  he 
was  unduly  hampered  and  thwarted  by  the  Wash- 
ington authorities.  And  Palfrey,  who,  beginning 
with  enthusiastic  admiration,  was  forced  in  the  end 
to  recognize  his  chieftain's  many  faults,  yet  de- 
clares that  "there  are  strong  grounds  for  believing 
that  he  was  the  best  commander  the  Army  of  the 
Potomac  ever  had,"  and  that  "a  growing  famil- 
iarity with  his  history  as  a  soldier  increases  the 
disposition  to  regard  him  with  respect  and  grati- 
tude, and  to  believe,  while  recognizing  the  limita- 
tions of  his  nature,  that  his  failure  to  accomplish 
more  was  partly  his  misfortune  and  not  altogether 
his  fault." 49 

It  will  be  observed  that  most  of  the  praise  is  in 
the  nature  of  apology  and  lacks  entirely  the  trum- 
pet tone  with  which  McClellan  proclaims  his  own 
feats  of  arms.  Much  of  the  criticism  of  him  has  no 
flavor  of  apology  whatever.  Nor  is  this  confined 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  23 

to  the  later  reflection  of  cool  military  judges.  At 
the  height  of  his  popularity,  when  the  army  and 
the  country  idolized  him,  outsiders  like  Gurowski 50 
refused  to  believe  in  his  gifts,  or  his  judgments,  or 
his  future.  W.  H.  Russell,  meeting  him  in  Septem- 
ber, 1861,  foresaw,  with  singular  acuteness,  that  he 
was  not  a  man  of  action  or  not  likely  to  act  quickly, 
and  felt  that  he  dallied  too  much  in  Washington, 
instead  of  being  among  his  troops,  stimulating 
them  in  victory  and  consoling  or  reprimanding 
them  after  defeat.51 

Among  the  general's  own  subordinates  there 
was  anything  but  a  concert  of  enthusiasm  about 
his  person  or  his  achievements.  Fighters  like 
Kearny  and  Hooker  were  naturally  dissatisfied. 
The  latter  did  not  hesitate  to  express  his  opinion 
freely  at  all  times,  telling  the  Committee  on  the 
Conduct  of  the  War  that  the  Peninsula  campaign 
failed  simply  because  of  lack  of  generalship  in  the 
commander.62  While  Kearny  wrote,  in  August, 
1862:  "McClellan  is  the  failure  I  ever  proclaimed 
him.  He  will  only  get  us  into  more  follies  —  more 
waste  of  blood  —  fighting  by  driblets.  He  has  lost 
the  confidence  of  all.  ...  He  is  burnt  out."  63 
And  Meade,  a  far  saner  and  more  reasonable  judge, 
expresses  himself  almost  as  strongly:  "He  was 
always  waiting  to  have  everything  just  as  he 
wanted  before  he  would  attack,  and  before  he 
could  get  things  arranged  as  he  wanted  them,  the 
enemy  pounced  on  him  and  thwarted  all  his  plans. 


24  UNION  PORTRAITS 

There  is  now  no  doubt  he  allowed  three  dis- 
tinct occasions  to  take  Richmond  slip  through 
his  hands,  for  want  of  nerve  to  run  what  he  consid- 
ered risks."  54 

This  contemporary  judgment  of  Meade's  may  be 
said,  on  the  whole,  to  anticipate  the  conclusion  of 
most  historians.  Some  dwell  more  than  others  on 
what  might  have  happened  if  McClellan  had  met 
with  fewer  difficulties;  but  there  is  wide  agreement 
that  the  result  of  his  efforts  is  as  disappointing 
when  viewed  now  calmly  in  the  light  of  all  known 
facts  as  it  was  to  Lincoln  and  the  country  in  1862. 
Swinton,  certainly  no  personal  enemy  of  McClel- 
lan, sums  up  the  matter  in  fairly  representative 
fashion:  "He  was  assuredly  not  a  great  general; 
for  he  had  the  pedantry  of  war  rather  than  the 
inspiration  of  war.  .  .  .  His  power  as  a  tactician 
was  much  inferior  to  his  talent  as  a  strategist,  and 
he  executed  less  boldly  than  he  conceived."  65 

So  we  recur  to  the  remark  of  Lee:  "Well,  if  that 

is  your  opinion  of  General ,  I  can  only  say  that 

you  differ  very  widely  from  the  general  himself." 
For  what  is  of  interest  to  us  is  not  McClellan's 
generalship,  but  McClellan's  character. 

Thus,  after  our  review  of  criticism  and  hostile 
judgments,  we  ask  ourselves,  What  impression  did 
all  this  make  on  the  subject  of  it?  He  heard  the 
criticism.  He  was  well  aware  of  the  judgments. 
Did  they  produce  any  impression  on  him?  Did  he 
say  to  himself:  After  all,  I  may  be  mistaken;  after 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  25 

all,  I  may  have  blundered?  Did  he  have  strange 
doubts  and  tormenting  anxieties,  as  to  whether, 
possibly,  a  great  opportunity  may  have  come  to 
him  and  he  may  not  have  been  equal  to  it?  I  have 
read  his  writings  carefully  and  I  find  nothing  of  the 
sort.  There  were  moments  of  trouble,  as  when 
Cox  noted  that  "the  complacent  look  which  I  had 
seen  upon  McClellan's  countenance  on  the  17th  [of 
September,  1862]  .  .  .  has  disappeared.  There  was 
a  troubled  look  instead."  56  There  were  moments 
of  anguish.  "Franklin  told  me  that  McClellan 
said  to  him,  as  they  followed  Lander's  corpse,  that 
he  almost  wished  he  was  in  the  coffin  instead  of 
Lander."  57  Moments  of  self-distrust  there  were 
not,  or  they  left  no  traces. 

It  is  true,  Mr.  Rhodes  points  out  that  with  ad- 
versity McClellan's  letters,  even  to  his  wife,  grew 
somewhat  humbler  and  less  assertive;  58  yet  in  his 
book,  written  twenty  years  later,  the  tone  is  much 
what  it  was  at  first.  It  is  true  that  in  many  places 
he  recognizes  generally  that  he  was  human  and 
that  humanity  is  always  liable  to  err.  He  even 
goes  so  far  as  to  admit  —  generally  —  that  "while 
striving  conscientiously  to  do  my  best,  it  may  well 
be  that  I  have  made  great  mistakes  that  my  vanity 
does  not  permit  me  to  perceive."  59  But  as  to 
particular  action  in  particular  circumstances,  he 
cannot  feel  anything  but  thorough  contentment. 
His  much  complained  of  delays  he  justifies  en- 
tirely. "Nor  has  he  [the  general  is  using  the  third 


26  UNION  PORTRAITS 

person],  even  at  this  distant  day,  and  after  much 
bitter  experience,  any  regret  that  he  persisted  in 
his  determination/'  60  His  most  singular  error, 
that  as  to  the  numbers  of  the  enemy,  was  probably 
never  shaken  to  the  end.  In  short,  one  brief  sen- 
tence sums  up  his  complicated  character  in  this 
regard  with  delightful  completeness:  "That  I  have 
to  a  certain  extent  failed  I  do  not  believe  to  be  my 
fault,  though  my  self-conceit  probably  blinds  me 
to  many  errors  that  others  see."  61 

Not  satisfied  with  impugning  McClellan's  gen- 
eralship, his  enemies  went  further  and  attacked 
his  loyalty.  His  known  dislike  of  radical  abolition- 
ism constantly  suggested  charges  of  indifference  to 
Union  success.  It  was  said  that  he  delayed  pur- 
posely. It  was  said  that  he  showed  traitorous 
friendliness  to  Southerners.  It  was  said  that  he 
did  not  wish  the  war  to  come  to  a  too  speedy  close, 
and  that  while  he  held  the  highest  military  office 
under  the  Government  he  was  ready  to  conspire 
for  a  change  in  the  Government  itself.  Even  Lin- 
coln, in  a  moment  of  despair  after  the  second  Bull 
Run,  observed  to  a  member  of  his  household,  "He 
has  acted  badly  towards  Pope;  he  really  wanted 
him  to  fail."  62  And  the  sum  of  all  these  charges  is 
given  in  the  remarkable  scene  between  President 
and  general  which  has  been  recorded  for  us  by 
McClellan  himself.  On  the  8th  of  March,  1862, 
McClellan  was  in  the  President's  office  and  Lincoln 
intimated  in  very  plain  terms  that  he  heard  many 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  27 

rumors  to  the  effect  that  the  general  was  removing 
the  defenders  from  Washington  for  the  purpose  of 
giving  the  city  over  to  the  enemy.  The  President 
concluded  by  saying  that  such  removal  did  look 
to  him  much  like  treason.63 

Lincoln  must  have  been  deeply  moved,  indeed, 
when  he  suggested  this,  'and  no  one  can  blame 
McClellan  for  resenting  it  bitterly  and  demanding 
an  instant  retraction,  for  we  know,  as  well  as  he 
did,  that  to  accuse  him  of  treason  in  any  proper 
sense  of  the  term  was  utterly  and  preposterously 
false.  Whatever  dispute  there  may  be  about 
McClellan's  generalship,  however  one  may  ques- 
tion the  wisdom  and  even  the  propriety  of  his  con- 
duct toward  his  superiors,  no  one  who  has  read  his 
intimate  letters  can  doubt  for  a  moment  that  he 
was  thoroughly  and  sincerely  patriotic,  desired 
only  the  welfare  of  his  country,  and  worked  in  the 
very  best  way  he  knew  for  the  complete  and 
speedy  restoration  of  the  Union.  His  way  may  not 
have  been  Lincoln's  way,  may  not  have  been  the 
best  way;  but  such  as  it.  was,  he  was  ready  to  give 
his  life  for  it.  "The  unity  of  this  nation,  the  pres- 
ervation of  our  institutions,  are  so  dear  to  me, 
that  I  have  willingly  sacrificed  my  private  happi- 
ness with  the  single  object  of  doing  my  duty  to  my 
country.  When  the  task  is  accomplished,  I  shall 
be  glad  to  return  to  the  obscurity  from  which 
events  have  drawn  me."  64 


28  UNION  PORTRAITS 

IV 

Such  words  have  been  written  by  others,  not 
always  with  entire  sincerity.  But  the  whole  tenor 
of  McClellan's  life  bears  witness  to  his  truth  in  this 
matter.  He  was  not  only  a  patriot,  he  was  a  man 
of  singular  purity  and  elevation  of  character.  He 
was  not  only  ready  to  talk  about  great  sacrifices, 
he  was  ready  to  do  what  is  far  harder,  make  little 
sacrifices  without  talking  about  them.  Even  dis- 
counting the  enthusiasm  of  a  biographer,  we  must 
recognize  the  force  of  such  testimony  as  the  fol- 
lowing: "Of  all  men  I  have  ever  known  McClellan 
was  the  most  unselfish.  Neither  in  his  public  life 
nor  in  his  private  life  did  he  ever  seek  anything  for 
himself.  He  was  constantly  doing  something  for 
some  one  else;  always  seeking  to  do  good,  confer 
pleasure,  relieve  sorrow,  gratify  a  whim,  do  some- 
thing for  another."  66 

His  unfailing  courtesy  toward  high  and  low  is 
universally  recognized,  and  it  was  not  the  courtesy 
of  indifferent  ease,  but  was  founded  on  genuine 
sympathy,  a  quick  imaginative  perception  of  the 
situation  of  others  and  a  desire  to  adapt  himself 
to  that  situation  so  far  as  was  compatible  with 
greater  needs  and  duties. 

In  short,  the  man's  life  throughout  was  guided 
by  fine  feelings  and  high  ideals.  That,  as  a  candi- 
date for  the  Presidency  against  Lincoln,  in  1864, 
he  was  influenced  by  no  thought  of  personal  ambi- 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  29 

tion  is  difficult  to  believe.  If  so,  it  was  probably 
the  first  and  the  last  case  of  the  kind  in  the  history 
of  that  office,  Washington  perhaps  excepted.  But 
I  do  believe  that  McClellan  sincerely  thought  the 
country  needed  him  and  his  political  convictions 
and  that  he  would  never  have  surrendered  one  jot 
of  those  political  convictions  for  political  success. 
In  his  later  years  he  became  governor  of  New 
Jersey,  and  in  that  office  so  carried  himself  as  to 
win  the  respect  and  esteem  of  persons  of  all  parties. 
A  competent  and  impartial  critic  remarks  that  "a 
study  of  his  messages  and  other  state  papers  will 
show  that  the  vital  questions  he  ever  held  in  mind 
were  those  connected  with  the  public  welfare  of 
the  people,  while  those  relating  to  his  own  political 
future  were  absolutely  non-existent."  66 

Also,  back  of  all  these  admirable  qualities  was  a 
religious  faith  as  simple  as  it  was  sincere.  Russell 
thought  the  general's  extreme  anxiety  for  Sabbath 
observance  in  the  army  a  little  inappropriate,  if 
not  a  little  puerile.  But  no  one  can  call  puerile  the 
high  ideal  of  Christian  restraint  in  warfare  set 
forth  in  the  Harrison's  Landing  letter  to  the  Presi- 
dent: "All  private  property  taken  for  military  use 
should  be  paid  or  receipted  for;  pillage  and  waste 
should  be  treated  as  high  crimes;  all  unnecessary 
trespass  sternly  prohibited,  and  offensive  de- 
meanor by  the  military  towards  citizens  promptly 
rebuked."  67  It  is  undeniable  that  Sherman,  work- 
ing on  the  "war  is  hell"  plan,  accomplished  more 


30  UNION  PORTRAITS 

immediate  results,  but  there  were  after-effects, 
also,  of  a  less  desirable  character. 

The  charm  of  McClellan's  personal  religion,  as 
it  appears  casually  in  all  his  writing,  is  very  great. 
Perhaps  it  is  nowhere  greater  than  in  the  simple 
and  touching  letter  written  to  a  friend  in  his  later 
years:  "  I  fancy,  Sam,  that  we  will  never  reach  that 
land  where  it  is  all  afternoon  in  any  ship  built  by 
mortal  hands.  Our  fate  is  to  work  and  still  to  work 
as  long  as  there  is  any  work  left  in  us;  and  I  do  not 
doubt  that  it  is  best,  for  I  can't  help  thinking  that 
when  we  reach  that  other  and  far  better  land  we 
shall  still  have  work  to  do  throughout  the  long 
ages,  only  we  shall  then  see  as  we  go  on  that  it  is 
all  done  for  the  Master  and  under  his  own  eye;  and 
we  will  like  it  and  never  grow  weary  of  it,  as  we 
often  do  here  when  we  don't  see  clearly  to  what 
end  we  are  working  and  our  work  brings  us  in  con- 
tact with  all  sorts  of  men  and  things  not  pleasant 
to  rub  against.  I  suppose  that  the  more  we  work 
here,  the  better  we  shall  be  trained  for  that  other 
work,  which  after  all  is  the  great  end  towards 
which  we  move  or  ought  to  be  moving."  68 

These  are  winning  words.  They  show  a  winning 
and  a  simple  soul,  the  soul  of  one  who  was  assur- 
edly a  fine  type  of  the  Christian  —  and  we  are 
proud  to  add,  of  the  American  —  gentleman. 

I  say  "winning"  advisedly;  for  as  yet  I  have 
dwelt  little  on  McClellan's  wonderful  power  of 
winning  men.  As  a  fighter  he  may  have  failed.  As 
a  leader,  at  least  so  far  as  the  faculty  of  gaining 


GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN  31 

absolute  devotion  goes,  he  assuredly  succeeded. 
It  is  true  that  not  all  his  officers  were  faithful  to 
him.  In  his  treatment  of  them  he  was  led  astray 
by  flattery  and  by  the  intoxicating  influence  of  his 
overwhelming  position.  But  his  power  over  the 
common  soldier  of  the  Army  of  the  Potomac,  even 
after  comparative  failure,  is  so  wonderful  as  to  be 
hard  to  believe  and  so  touching  as  to  be  impos- 
sible to  resist.  No  general  in  the  war,  on  either 
side,  unless  Beauregard,  who  curiously  resembled 
McClellan  in  many  ways,  evoked  such  instantane- 
ous and  entire  enthusiasm.  The  subtle  causes  of 
this  would  be  difficult  to  trace.  Perhaps  the  love 
of  popularity  counted  for  something;  but  human 
sympathy  and  kindness  assuredly  counted  for 
much.  As  to  the  effects  there  can  be  no  dispute. 
"Let  military  critics  or  political  enemies  say  what 
they  will,  he  who  could  so  move  upon  the  hearts  of 
a  great  army  as  the  wind  sways  long  rows  of  stand- 
ing corn,  was  no  ordinary  man/'  writes  General 
Walker.69  And  one  who  witnessed  the  passionate 
outburst  of  the  troops  when  their  leader  was 
restored  to  them  in  September,  1862,  describes  it 
in  a  way  never  to  be  forgotten:  "The  climax 
seemed  to  be  reached,  however,  at  Middletown, 
where  we  first  caught  sight  of  the  enemy.  Here, 
upon  our  arrival,  we  found  General  McClellan 
sitting  upon  his  horse  in  the  road.  ...  As  each 
organization  passed  the  general  the  men  became 
apparently  forgetful  of  everything  but  their  love 
for  him.  They  cheered  and  cheered  again,  until 


32  UNION  PORTRAITS 

they  became  so  hoarse  they  could  cheer  no  longer. 
It  seemed  as  if  an  intermission  had  been  declared 
in  order  that  a  reception  might  be  tendered  to  the 
general-in-chief.  A  great  crowd  continually  sur- 
rounded him,  and  the  most  extravagant  demon- 
strations were  indulged  in.  Hundreds  even  hugged 
the  horse's  legs  and  caressed  his  head  and  mane. 
While  the  troops  were  thus  surging  by,  the  general 
continually  pointed  with  his  finger  to  the  gap  in 
the  mountains  through  which  our  path  lay.  It  was 
like  a  scene  in  a  play,  with  the  roar  of  guns  for 
an  accompaniment.  .  .  .  General  McClellan  may 
have  had  opponents  elsewhere;  he  had  few,  if  any, 
among  the  soldiers  whom  he  commanded."  70 

This  magnetic  power  over  the  hearts  of  men  is 
something  great  leaders  —  Wellington,  for  in- 
stance —  have  often  lacked.  It  is  something  the 
very  greatest  leaders  must  have,  if  they  would 
retain  their  hold.  What  a  pity  that  McClellan, 
having  it  in  such  abundant  measure,  should  not 
have  been  able  to  employ  it  for  his  purposes,  that 
possessing  such  a  great  instrument,  he  should  not 
have  been  able  to  use  it  to  great  ends.  He  himself 
attributed  his  failure  to  circumstances.  This  we 
cannot  do.  Others  have  wrung  fortune  out  of 
far  more  unfavorable  circumstances.  Let  us  say, 
rather,  that  he  was  a  man  of  real  power  given  too 
great  an  opportunity.  As  an  able  soldier,  true  pa- 
triot, and  loyal  gentleman,  he  did  what  he  could. 


II 

JOSEPH  HOOKER 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Hadley,  Massachusetts,  November  13, 1814. 

Graduated  at  West  Point,  1837. 

In  Mexican  War,  1846,  1847. 

Resigned  commission  and  settled  in  California,  1853. 

Colonel  of  California  militia,  1859. 

Brigadier-general  of  volunteers,  1861. 

Prominent  in  Peninsula  battles,  May,  June,  1862. 

Prominent  at  Antietam,  September,  1862. 

Prominent  at  Fredericksburg,  December,  1862. 

Commanded  Army  of  the  Potomac  at  Chancellorsville, 

May,  1863. 

Succeeded  by  Meade,  June  28, 1863. 
Active  in  West  till  summer  of  1864. 
Relinquished  command  of  Twentieth  Corps,  July,  1864. 
Married  Olivia  Groesbeck,  October  4, 1865. 
Stricken  with  paralysis,  1867. 
Died,  October  31, 1879. 


II 

JOSEPH  HOOKER 
I 

tf  *.  - 

To  say  that  the  outer  man  was  the  best  part  of 
Hooker  would  be  perhaps  unjust.  But  all  agree 
that  the  outer  man  was  very  striking.  He  was  tall, 
thoroughly  martial  in  carriage,  with  blond  hair, 
finely  cut  features,  an  expressive  mouth,  and  large 
blue  eyes  full  of  fire  and  of  sympathy.  The  rich 
glow  of  his  complexion  characterized  him  from 
boyhood,  so  that  an  enthusiastic  female  admirer 
declared,  when  he  left  West  Point,  that  with  his 
ruddy  cheeks,  blue  coat,  and  white  trousers,  he  was 
a  perfect  epitome  of  the  American  flag.1  Villard 
thought  only  one  other  man  in  the  whole  army, 
Hancock,  approached  Hooker  in  the  splendor  of  his 
exterior.  But  General  Walker  observes  shrewdly 
that  he  was  "handsome  and  picturesque  in  the 
extreme,  though  with  a  fatally  weak  chin."  2 
Turn  to  almost  any  of  the  portraits  and  you  will 
see  what  General  Walker  means.  Bear  it  in  mind 
in  our  further  study. 

Hooker  was  a  Massachusetts  man,  born  in  Had- 
ley  in  1814.  His  father  seems  to  have  had  no  great 
force  of  character,  but  his  mother  was  high- 
principled,  energetic,  and  had  much  influence  over 


36  UNION  PORTRAITS 

her  children.  It  is  said  that  she  intended  her  son 
for  the  Church.3  Failing  in  this,  she  doubtless 
supplemented  the  education  given  him  at  the  local 
academy,  and  sent  him  to  West  Point  with  the 
average  mental  equipment  of  a  cadet  of  that  day. 

At  West  Point  he  did  not  stand  very  high.  But 
there  is  a  notable  legend  that  he  would  have  stood 
much  higher  than  twenty-eighth  in  his  class  if  his 
decided  combative  tendencies  had  not  injured  him.4 
Whether  this  be  true  or  not,  straight-out  fighting 
was  his  line  in  life.  Where  he  could  fight  simply,  he 
accomplished  something.  Where  he  could  not,  his 
success  was  much  less  marked.  And  he  sometimes 
fought  those  who  should  not  have  been  his  enemies. 

In  the  Mexican  War  he  won  credit  and  deserved 
it.  He  showed  personal  bravery  and  the  rarer  gift 
of  inspiring  bravery  in  others.  Thrice  he  was 
brevetted,  a  distinction  which  fell  to  few.  He 
served  on  the  staff  of  General  Pillow  and  his  en- 
thusiastic biographer  asserts  that  he  furnished 
"  all  the  brains  and  most  of  the  energy  and  industry 
to  be  found  at  the  headquarters  of  the  division." 
Perhaps  this  is  slightly  exaggerated.5 

Everybody  knows  that  Hooker  was  called 
"Fighting  Joe."  Not  everybody  knows  that  the 
name  was  not  given  by  the  troops,  but  in  pure 
accident  by  a  newspaper  compositor,  who,  having 
to  interpret  the  telegraphic  abbreviation  "fighting 
—  Joe  Hooker,"  dropped  the  dash  and  created  a 
world-known  sobriquet.6  Hooker  did  not  like  the 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  37 

name,  or  said  he  did  not;  thought  that  it  made  him 
seem  like  a  highwayman  or  bandit.  And  perhaps 
it  has  hurt  him  as  much  as  it  has  helped  him. 

When  the  Civil  War  began,  Hooker  was  entirely 
suited.  He  did  not  get  into  active  service  till  after 
Bull  Run,  but  in  the  Peninsula  battles  he  fought 
well.  At  Williamsburg  his  .division  distinguished 
itself  highly.  "In  every  engagement,"  says  Gen- 
eral J.  F.  Rusling,  "he  always  seemed  to  know 
exactly  what  to  do  and  when  to  do  it."  7  McClellan 
did,  indeed,  depreciate  his  subordinate  and  there 
was  not  much  kindliness  between  them.  But  good 
judges  justify  Hooker.  And  his  own  reported  com- 
ment on  his  commander's  coldness  is  a  pleasant 
instance  of  the  frank  humor  which  must  have  been 
an  element  of  his  social  charm:  "I  say,  Mott,  it 
seems  to  me  you  and  I,  and  your  Jersey  Blues  and 
the  Excelsior  Brigade,  were  not  at  Williamsburg 
at  all!  Hancock  did  the  business." 8 

This  social  charm  was  felt  by  many  who  came 
closely  into  contact  with  the  general,  and  for  this 
and  other  things  he  was  unquestionably  much 
beloved  by  his  troops.  He  talked  with  them  as 
man  to  man,  took  a  personal  interest  in  their 
doings,  did  not  let  great  affairs  thrust  out  little 
kindnesses.  General  Rusling  once  went  to  his  di- 
vision commander  to  get  leave  for  an  invalid  and 
was  refused  even  attention.  Then  he  made  his  way 
to  Hooker,  at  that  time  commander-in-chief. 
"Let  me  have  it  [the  paper],"  Hooker  said.  "I'll 


38  UNION  PORTRAITS 

show  General a  'leave'  can  be  granted  with- 
out his  approval,  in  a  case  like  this."  9  When 
Berry  was  killed,  Hooker  "with  tears  in  his  eyes 
kissed  his  forehead  and  said,  "My  God,  Berry, 
why  was  the  man  on  whom  I  relied  so  much  to  be 
taken  away  in  this  manner?  ' "  10  Hooker  was  just, 
too,  and  fair  in  dealing  with  his  subordinates. 
Colonel  J.  A.  Reynolds  writes  me:  "  I  was  with  him 
every  day  for  eight  months,  and  I  say,  without  hesi- 
tancy, I  never  knew  a  man  who  tried  to  be  fairer 
and  treat  every  one  more,  justly  than  he  did.  He 
would  treat  the  lowest  in  rank  with  the  same  cour- 
tesy as  the  highest,  and  no  commander  was  more 
beloved  by  his  troops  than  was  he  by  the  20th 
Corps." 

The  fighting  reputation  that  Hooker  had  won  on 
the  Peninsula  continued  and  increased  through  the 
second  Bull  Run  campaign  and  at  Antietam,  where 
he  was  wounded  after  an  energetic  attack  on 
the  Confederate  left.  His  vigor  and  enthusiasm 
showed  not  only  in  bare  fighting,  but  in  strenuous 
effort  to  keep  his  troops  responsive  and  his  officers 
efficient.  With  what  force  does  he  express  himself 
against  an  attempt  to  deprive  him  of  one  of  the 
best  of  them.  "I  have  just  been  shown  an  order 
relieving  Brigadier-General  Reynolds  from  the 
command  of  a  division  in  my  corps.  I  request  that 
the  major-general  commanding  will  not  heed  this 
order;  a  scared  governor  ought  not  to  be  permitted 
to  destroy  the  usefulness  of  an  entire  division  of  the 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  39 

army,  on  the  eve  of  important  operations."  u 
But  his  most  attractive  mood  is  undoubtedly  that 
in  which,  he  feels  the  thrill  and  enthusiasm  of 
actual  battle.  "The  whole  morning  had  been  one 
of  unusual  animation  to  me  and  fraught  with  the 
grandest  events.  The  conduct  of  my  troops  was 
sublime,  and  the  occasion  almost  lifted  me  to  the 
skies,  and  its  memories  will  ever  remain  near 
me."  12 

This  was  at  Antietam,  where  there  was  triumph. 
Equally  fine  was  the  general's  attitude  at  Freder- 
icksburg,  where  there  was  defeat.  Though  he 
would  expose  his  men  regardlessly  in  battle,  he 
was  always  thoughtful  of  their  welfare,  so  far 
as  was  compatible  with  duty.  When  some  neg- 
lect was  shown  in  the  handling  of  ambulances,  his 
rebuke  was  severe:  "I  regret  more  than  all  to  find 
two  officers  of  my  command,  holding  high  and 
responsible  positions,  showing  so  little  concern 
for  the  efficiency  and  welfare  of  the  command 
to  which  they  are  assigned  as  to  seek  by  artifice 
and  unfairness  to  destroy  one  and  disregard  the 
other."  13  Hence  it  was  that  this  fighter,  this  man 
who  was  lifted  almost  to  the  skies  by  the  exhilara- 
tion of  combat,  would  not  fling  his  soldiers  against 
the  impossible  without  a  protest.  Burnside  ordered 
the  charge.  "I  sent  my  aide  to  General  Burnside 
to  say  that  I  advised  him  not  to  attack  at  that 
place.  He  returned  saying  that  the  attack  must 
be  made.  I  had  the  matter  so  much  at  heart  that 


40  UNION  PORTRAITS 

I  put  spurs  to  my  horse  and  rode  over  here  myself 
and  tried  to  persuade  General  Burnside  to  desist 
from  the  attack.  He  insisted  on  its  being  made."  l4 
It  was  made,  magnificently,  and  failed  magnifi- 
cently. Said  Hooker  of  it  afterwards,  with  caustic 
frankness:  "Finding  that  I  had  lost  as  many  men 
as  my  orders  required  me  to  lose,  I  suspended  the 
attack."  15 

II 

Thus  the  country  generally  saw  Hooker  on  the 
eve  of  the  battle  of  Chancellorsville,  in  April, 
1863,  a  brilliant,  vigorous,  successful  soldier  and 
corps-commander,  full  of  fight  yet  not  without 
prudence,  widely  popular  and  fairly  trusted.  The 
germs  of  his  defects  had  been  manifest  long  before, 
however,  and  we  must  look  into  them  closely  in 
preparation  for  our  study  of  the  great  climax  of 
his  life. 

All  generalizations  are  dangerous  and  all  the 
adjectives  we  apply  to  character  are  generaliza- 
tions. The  Southern  officer  Magruder,  who  had 
served  in  the  same  regiment  with  Hooker  in  Mex- 
ico, told  Fremantle  that  "  Hooker  was  essentially 
a  mean  man  and  a  liar."  16  Hooker  did  mean 
things  and  made  false  statements.  So  have  you. 
So  have  I.  But  it  is  not  just,  I  hope,  to  call  you  a 
liar,  nor  me,  nor  Hooker,  with  all  the  grave  impli- 
cations of  the  word.  Again,  Palfrey,  who  knew  him 
well,  says  that  he  was  "brave,  handsome,  vain, 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  41 

insubordinate,  plausible,  untrustworthy."  17  Ele- 
ments in  the  man's  character  may  justify  all  these 
words,  but  they  need  to  be  supplemented  by 
others. 

Let  us  look  more  closely  into  details.  Hooker 
was  accused  of  excessive  drinking.  Nearly  all  army 
men  at  that  time  drank.  There  is  good  evidence 
that  Hooker,  with  his  nervous,  high-strung  tem- 
perament, was  unusually  susceptible  to  alcohol, 
and  it  may  be  that  his  collapse  in  the  crisis  of 
Chancellorsville  was  in  part  the  direct  or  indirect 
result  of  stimulants,  though  no  such  explanation  is 
really  required.  There  is,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
best  of  evidence,  notably  that  of  Meade,  that  no 
indecent  excess  of  drinking  can  be  charged  against 
Hooker  while  in  command  of  the  Army  of  the 
Potomac,  and  the  testimony  of  those  who  lived 
closest  to  him  later,  in  the  West,  proves  absolutely 
that  his  habits  there  were  sober  and  reputable. 

Some  knowledge  of  his  earlier  life  is  necessary  in 
order  to  appreciate  the  force  of  the  charges  that  are 
brought  against  him.  When  he  left  West  Point, 
he  was  a  total  abstainer,  yet  the  florid  complexion, 
which  later  was  attributed  to  alcohol,  was  just 
as  marked  in  the  cadet  as  in  the  major-general. 
Wearied  with  the  dull  affairs  of  peace,  he  settled  in 
California,  in  the  wild  gold  days.  There  he  farmed, 
with  small  success,  and  no  doubt  he  lived  as  many 
about  him  were  living,  unprofitably,  to  say  the 
least.  There  is  a  story  that  he  borrowed  money 


42  UNION  PORTRAITS 

from  Halleck  and  Sherman,  that  he  came  to  San 
Francisco  one  Saturday  to  make  payment  after 
closing  hours,  and  that  by  Monday  morning  the 
money  was  gone.  This,  with  similar  incidents,  is 
said  to  have  been  the  origin  of  Halleck's  and 
Sherman's  prejudice  against  him.  The  anecdote 
does  not,  however,  seem  quite  enough  to  justify  a 
sentence  in  a  confidential  letter  from  Halleck  to 
Sherman,  September  16,  1864:  "He  [Hooker]  is 
aware  that  I  know  something  about  his  character 
and  conduct  in  California,  and  fearing  that  I  may 
use  that  information  against  him,  he  seeks  to  ward 
off  its  effects  by  making  it  appear  that  I  am  his 
personal  enemy."  18 

Another  curious  (if  true)  detail  about  this  Cali- 
fornia life  is  furnished  by  Stoneman.  Hooker,  he 
says,  "could  play  the  best  game  of  poker  I  ever 
saw  until  it  came  to  the  point  when  he  should  go 
a  thousand  better,  and  then  he  would  flunk."  19 
This  may  have  been  colored  by  recollections  of 
Chancellorsville.  Still,  when  I  read  it,  I  am  re- 
minded of  that  weak  chin. 

Whatever  the  dissipations  of  the  life  in  Cali- 
fornia, they  cannot  have  been  wholly  damning, 
since  Hooker  afterwards  came  to  fill  important 
positions  in  the  great  Western  State  and  enough 
friends  were  found  who  believed  in  his  future  to 
subscribe  his  expenses  on  to  Washington  when  the 
war  began. 

As  with  Halleck  and  Sherman  thus  early,  how- 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  43 

ever,  he  had  the  serious  defect  of  offending  wan- 
tonly those  whom  he  should  not  have  offended.  In 
Mexico,  for  instance,  he  had  been  attached  to  the 
staff  of  Pillow.  When  Pillow  was  arraigned  and 
his  conduct  investigated  on  the  charges  of  Scott, 
Hooker  spoke  his  mind  with  entire  freedom  in 
defense  of  his  chief  and  gained  the  hostility  of  the 
older  general.  As  a  consequence  of  this,  and  per- 
haps of  other  grounds  of  prejudice,  the  California 
recruit  waited  vainly  for  some  time  before  he 
could  enter  the  Army  of  the  Potomac. 

In  this  case  it  was  Hooker's  tongue  that  dam- 
aged him  and  it  cannot  be  denied  that  all  his  life 
that  insignificant  member  caused  him  a  great  deal 
of  trouble.  It  was  a  splendidly  vivid  and  energetic 
tongue,  could  stir  an  army  to  a  charge,  could  cheer 
and  stimulate  a  friend  and  smite  an  enemy.  With 
what  a  keen  flash  does  it  lighten  the  metallic  brev- 
ity of  a  despatch:  "The  enemy  may  number  4000, 
or  5000,  those  half  starved  and  badly  wounded. 
The  number  of  major-generals  and  brigadier- 
generals  they  have  along  is  of  no  consequence; 
they  are  flesh  and  blood."  20 

But  this  same  tongue  could  work  astonishing 
havoc  with  reputations,  most  of  all  its  owner's.  It 
could  brand  individuals  with  a  hot  iron.  "If  Gen- 
eral Sumner  had  advanced  the  rebellion  would 
have  been  buried  there.  He  did  not  advance  at 
all."  21  Do  you  think  General  Sumner  loved  that 
tongue?  It  could  blight,  if  unintentionally,  a  whole 


44  UNION  PORTRAITS 

arm  of  the  service.  "  Who  ever  saw  a  dead  cavalry- 
man?" At  the  very  outset  of  the  war  it  achieved 
one  of  its  most  remarkable  feats,  unsurpassed,  if 
equaled,  later.  Tired  of  seeking  employment  from 
direct  military  authority  and  ready  to  return  to 
California,  Hooker  called  on  the  President  to  ex- 
plain his  position.  After  explaining  it,  he  concluded 
with  the  casual  comment:  "I  was  at  Bull  Run  the 
other  day,  Mr.  President  [inspecting  the  ground, 
the  general  means],  and  it  is  no  vanity  in  me  to  say 
I  am  a  damned  sight  better  general  than  you  had 
on  that  field."  22  Must  it  not  have  been  indeed  a 
man  of  some  kind  of  power  who  could  utter  such 
words  as  that  and  actually  make  Lincoln  believe 
them? 

Well,  the  tongue  went  on  its  way,  along 
with  the  hand  and  sword,  through  the  Peninsula, 
through  Antietam  and  Fredericksburg.  McClellan ! 
Hooker  thought  poorly  of  McClellan  and  said  so. 
McClellan  was  a  baby.  McClellan  dared  not  fight. 
If  McClellan  had  done  as  Hooker  urged  and 
wished,  Richmond  would  have  been  ours  in  the 
spring  of  1862.  The  subordinate  testified  formally 
before  the  Committee  on  the  Conduct  of  the  War 
that  the  failure  of  the  Peninsula  campaign  was  "to 
be  attributed  to  the  want  of  generalship  on  the 
part  of  the  commander."  23 

When  Burnside  succeeded  McClellan,  it  was  the 
same  with  Burnside.  Villard,  as  a  newspaper  man, 
met  Hooker  for  the  first  time  and  had  scarcely 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  45 

introduced  himself  when  the  general  burst  into 
unsparing  criticism  of  the  Government,  of  Halleck, 
of  McClellan,  and  especially  of  his  immediate 
superior.24  To  his  fellow  soldiers  he  naturally  did 
not  hesitate  to  express  the  same  opinions,  and 
when  he  was  himself  in  supreme  command,  he 
wrote  about  his  predecessor  words  of  almost  in- 
credible violence.  Hooker  "cannot  bear  to  go  into 
battle  with  the  slanders  of  this  wretch  uncontra- 
dicted.  He  must  swallow  his  words  as  soon  as  I  am 
in  a  condition  to  address  him,  or  I  will  hunt  him  to 
the  ends  of  the  earth."  25  By  the  way,  I  am  not 
aware  that  the  wretch  ever  did  swallow  his  words, 
or  ever  was  hunted. 

A  dangerous  tongue,  indeed,  you  see,  and  per- 
haps there  was  a  little  trouble  back  of  the  tongue; 
perhaps  the  thinking  brain  was  not  quite  so  effec- 
tive an  instrument  as  the  acting  hand.  When  that 
bluff  Confederate,  Whiting,  writes  to  Beauregard, 
"Hooker  is  a  fool,  and  always  was,  and  that's  a 
comfort/'  26  the  exaggerated  estimate  deserves 
notice  chiefly  because  it  is  certain,  with  others 
similar,  to  have  made  its  way  to  Lee  and  to  have 
been  his  best  excuse  for  Jackson's  apparently  fool- 
hardy movement  at  Chancellorsville.  But  when 
Chase,  Hooker's  friend  and  warm  supporter,  after 
a  confidential  talk  with  the  general,  remarks  that 
he  "impressed  me  favorably  as  a  frank,  manly, 
brave,  and  energetic  soldier,  of  somewhat  less 
breadth  of  intellect  than  I  had  expected,"  27  the 


46  UNION  PORTRAITS 

thoughtful  observer  is  prepared  for  a  career  which 
shall  blend  its  triumphs  with  failure,  if  not  with 
disaster. 

in 

To  this  man,  then,  such  as  we  have  seen  him, 
Lincoln,  in  January,  1863,  confided  the  splendid 
Army  of  the  Potomac  and  the  salvation  of  the 
Union.  The  President  had  his  serious  misgivings 
and  expressed  them  in  a  well-known  letter,  surely 
one  of  the  most  singular  ever  received  by  a  general 
on  undertaking  an  important  command.  Lincoln 
warns  his  subordinate  against  ambition,  warns  him 
against  over-confidence,  warns  him  not  to  talk 
about  a  dictatorship  until  he  has  done  things 
worthy  of  it,  warns  him  to  fear  the  spirit  of  insub- 
ordination in  the  army  which  Hooker  himself  has 
been  the  most  forward  to  cultivate.  One  can  eas- 
ily imagine  the  impatient  contempt  with  which 
McClellan  would  have  received  such  a  letter. 
Well,  all  that  is  really  fine  and  winning  and  lovable 
in  Hooker  shines  out  in  his  simple  comment  to  his 
officers  on  receiving  it:  "He  talks  to  me  like  a 
father.  I  shall  not  answer  this  letter  until  I  have 
won  him  a  great  victory."  28 

But,  alas,  the  general  entered  upon  his  impor- 
tant duties  without  the  real  confidence  of  the  higher 
officers  under  him.  "He  had  wounded  some  by 
openly  criticizing  them,"  says  De  Trobriand;  "he 
had  alienated  others  by  putting  himself  forward 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  47 

at  their  expense/' 29  And  again  the  fatal  tongue 
intervened,  with  trouble  at  its  tip.  Grand  reviews, 
riding,  all  gold  and  glitter,  in  company  with  presi- 
dents and  ministers  and  silken  petticoats,  that 
splendid  army  in  the  spring  sunshine  set  over 
against  those  starved  and  ragged  rebels,  engen- 
dered a  confidence  which  would  burst  from  lips  not 
tutored  to  keep  still.  "The  finest  army  on  the 
planet."  "The  operations  of  the  last  three  days 
have  determined  that  our  enemy  must  either  in- 
gloriously  fly,  or  give  us  battle  on  our  own  ground, 
where  certain  destruction  awaits  him."  30  "My 
plans  are  perfect,  and  when  I  start  to  carry  them 
out,  may  God  have  mercy  on  General  Lee,  for  I 
will  have  none."  31  "The  enemy  is  in  my  power, 
and  God  Almighty  cannot  deprive  me  of  them."  32 
Such  words  as  these  suggest  the  Nemesis  of  great 
tragedy  and  give  an  enthralling  interest  to  the 
dramatic  story  of  the  man  who  uttered  them. 

At  first  all  went  smoothly.  Through  the  spring 
months  the  general  reorganized  his  army,  which 
had  suffered  somewhat  from  repeated  failures  and 
changes  of  command,  and  did  it  well.  Especially 
he  put  the  cavalry  into  more  efficient  condition 
and  began  the  development  of  the  admirable 
instrument  which,  in  the  end,  served  Sheridan  and 
others  so  successfully. 

Then,  with  the  warm  April  days,  came  the  prep- 
arations for  action.  The  plan  finally  adopted  is 
said  to  have  originated,  to  some  extent,  with 


48  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Warren.  No  matter  with  whom  it  originated, 
Hooker  made  it  his  own,  and  all  admit  that  it  was 
an  able  strategic  design.  From  the  point  of  view 
of  Hooker's  character  we  note,  in  this  regard,  a 
rather  singular  contradiction.  Here  was  a  man 
who  always  talked  too  freely,  who  was  notorious 
for  saying  things  he  should  not  have  said;  yet,  the 
minute  the  full  burden  rested  on  his  shoulders,  he 
kept  still.  Even  to  his  nearest  subordinates  he 
whispered  no  word  of  his  intention,  except  so  far 
as  necessary  orders  required. 

The  general  plan  of  campaign  was  simple. 
Hooker's  army  was  massed  on  the  north  side  of 
the  Rappahannock,  Lee's  on  the  south,  in  the  vi- 
cinity of  Fredericksburg.  Hooker  proposed  first 
crossing  his  cavalry  well  up  the  river,  to  threaten 
or  break  the  communications  of  Lee.  Then  the 
bulk  of  the  army  was  to  cross  above  the  enemy, 
sweep  round  with  a  great  turning  movement  and 
drive  him  toward  the  east,  while  another  force, 
under  Sedgwick,  crossing  at  Fredericksburg,  was 
to  bar  retreat  in  that  direction  and  crush  the  small 
army  of  the  Confederates  between  the  two. 

From  the  beginning  the  weak  point  of  the 
scheme  was  the  combined  action  with  Sedgwick. 
Still,  the  first  steps  went  admirably.  The  great 
crossing,  by  the  upper  fords,  was  made  before  the 
enemy  divined  it,  with  entire  success.  Corps  after 
corps  swept  forward  triumphantly  into  the  Wild- 
erness, and  it  seemed  as  if  Lee  would  really  be 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  49 

crushed,  as  his  antagonist  had  planned.  But  Lee 
did  not  propose  to  be  crushed.  He  met  the  advanc- 
ing batallions  in  a  much  more  aggressive  fashion 
than  Hooker  expected.  And  suddenly  this  check 
in  his  plans  seemed  to  chill  the  buoyant  spirit  of 
the  Union  commander.  Instead  of  urging  his  gen- 
erals, On!  on!  he  sent  word  to  them,  Withdraw,  the 
woods  are  too  thick,  the  enemy  too  strong,  let  us 
establish  ourselves  safely  at  Chancellorsville  and 
wait.  It  was  like  a  burst  balloon,  like  a  great  ship 
set  aback  all  at  once  and  left  shivering  in  a  change 
of  wind.  "  To  hear  from  his  own  lips  that  the  ad- 
vantages gained  by  the  successful  marches  of  his 
lieutenants  were  to  culminate  in  fighting  a  defen- 
sive battle  in  that  nest  of  thickets  was  too  much, 
and  I  retired  from  his  presence  with  the  belief  that 
my  commanding  general  was  a  whipped  man," 
says  General  Couch.33 

So  thought  Lee  and  Jackson  also.  The  next  day, 
May  2,  Jackson,  with  a  large  part  of  Lee's  army, 
made  his  way  through  the  woods  across  Hooker's 
front  and  past  his  right.  Then,  toward  evening, 
the  Confederates  fell,  like  a  whirlwind,  upon 
the  Union  right  flank,  Howard  and  his  Eleventh 
Corps,  who  had  hardly  dreamed  of  such  an  onset 
and  had  done  little  or  nothing  to  prevent  it.  It 
is  not  necessary  to  apportion  the  blame  strictly 
in  this  matter.  There  is  enough  for  every  one, — 
Hooker,  Howard,  the  division  commanders,  and 
the  troops,  of  course  with  most  honorable  excep- 


50  UNION  PORTRAITS 

tions,  —  enough  and  some  left  over.  The  disaster 
was  as  appalling  as  it  was  unexpected,  and  it 
might  have  been  much  worse,  if  night,  the  fatigue 
of  the  Confederates,  and  the  wounding  of  Jackson 
had  not  intervened. 

Where  was  Hooker?  Doing  what  a  brave  and 
energetic  soldier  could  do  to  repair  immediate 
damage,  but  hardly  grasping  the  general  situation 
as  an  able  commander  should  have  grasped  it. 
The  next  morning  gave  him  his  opportunity,  but 
instead  of  profiting,  he  fought  a  slow,  defensive 
battle,  in  which  the  energetic  masses  of  Lee  and 
Stuart  had  all  the  advantage. 

Then  the  general  was  severely  injured  by  the 
falling  of  a  wooden  pillar,  and  some  think  the  acci- 
dent robbed  him  of  great  glory,  and  some  that  for 
him  it  was  a  piece  of  rare  good  fortune.  Even 
before,  his  subordinates  felt  that  he  had  lost  his 
hold.  It  was  said  that  he  was  drinking.  It  has  been 
said  since  that  he  was  wholly  abstemious  and 
missed  his  drink.  This  would  certainly  be  the  first 
case  in  history  of  a  great  battle  lost  because  the 
general-in-chief  was  not  intoxicated. 

Be  that  as  it  may,  after  he  was  injured,  he 
ceased  to  be  of  any  great  value  on  the  field  of 
Chancellorsville.  His  admirers  maintain  that  the 
injury  is  amply  sufficient  to  account  for  this.  They 
say  that  his  second  in  command,  Couch,  should 
have  assumed  the  direction  of  affairs  and  pushed 
the  fighting.  Couch  himself,  however,  absolutely 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  51 

refused  to  take  responsibility  when  he  might  be 
interfered  with  at  any  moment.  And  he  and  many 
others  hold  that  Hooker's  control  was  no  less  effi- 
cient after  the  wound  than  it  was  before.  "There 
is,  in  fact,  no  reason  to  suppose  that  his  orders 
would  have  been  wise,  even  if  he  had  not  been 
struck,"  34  says  the  latest  authority  on  the  battle, 
Colonel  W.  R.  Livermore.  Still,  still  I  remember 
that  weak  chin. 

The  small  Confederate  army  could  not,  however, 
make  any  ruinous  impression  on  the  Union  masses. 
What,  then,  was  to  be  done?  Behold,  the  general 
who  had  clutched  his  foe  so  tightly  that  Almighty 
God  could  not  extricate  him,  was  now  for  recross- 
ing  the  river  and  beginning  all  over  again.  It 
seems,  supplies  had  run  short.  "I  think,"  says  one 
critic, "  (if  we  can  imagine  Grant  allowing  his  army 
to  be  placed  where  Hooker's  was  at  noon  on  that 
day),  that  he  would  have  made  his  soldiers  fry 
their  boots,  if  there  was  nothing  else  to  eat,  before 
he  would  have  recrossed  the  river."  36  But  Hooker 
was  not  disposed  to  fry  boots.  He  called  his  corps 
commanders  into  council.  A  majority  of  them 
voted  to  remain  where  they  were,  Meade,  to  be 
sure,  alleging  that  recrossing  might  be  difficult 
with  the  enemy  at  their  heels,  to  which  Hooker 
answered  that  Lee  would  be  delighted  to  have 
them  on  the  other  side  of  the  Rappahannock.  Is 
there  not  a  maxim  of  Napoleon's  about  never 
doing  what  your  enemy  wishes  you  to  do?  If  so, 


52  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Hooker  had  forgotten  it.  He  overruled  his  subor- 
dinates, ordered  the  puzzled  Sedgwick  to  withdraw 
also,  and  with  the  best  speed  he  could  took  back 
that  great,  unconquered  army  to  the  place  it  had 
left  a  week  before  with  banners  waving  and  all  the 
royal  assurance  of  undoubted  triumph. 

The  army  was  unconquered,  but  the  general  was 
beaten  badly,  and  what  was  much  worse,  the  cause 
had  received  another  crushing  blow.  It  was  not 
merely  that  so  many  men  had  been  killed  and 
wounded.  It  was  not  merely  that  Lee,  with  inferior 
numbers,  had  managed  to  sustain  himself  instead 
of  giving  an  inch  of  ground.  It  was  that  all  the 
strength  and  all  the  valor  of  the  North  had  been 
exerted  once  more  and  had  utterly  failed.  It  was 
that  a  fourth  commander  had  been  allowed  to 
work  his  pleasure  with  that  long-suffering  army, 
and  still  the  rebellion  was  as  haughty,  as  energetic, 
as  aggressive  as  ever.  So  that  Lincoln  fell  on  his 
knees  and  told  his  God  that  the  country  could 
not  endure  another  Fredericksburg  or  Chancel- 
lorsville.36 

But  Hooker?  Did  he  look  at  the  thing  in  this 
way?  Not  the  least  bit  in  the  world.  In  the  midst 
of  the  battle  his  confidence  seems  to  have  been  for 
a  little  time  shaken.  But  he  quickly  recovered 
himself.  The  tremendous  moral  effect  of  the  whole 
adventure,  after  all  his  vaunting,  seems  to  have 
escaped  him  completely.  On  the  very  day  of  the  re- 
crossing  he  issued  general  orders  the  tone  of  which 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  53 

is  almost  incredible.  "In  fighting  at  a  disadvan- 
tage, we  would  have  been  recreant  to  our  trust,  to 
ourselves,  our  cause,  and  our  country.  Profoundly 
loyal,  and  conscious  of  its  strength,  the  Army  of 
the  Potomac  will  give  or  decline  battle  whenever 
its  interest  or  honor  may  demand.  It  will  also 
be  the  guardian  of  its  own.  history  and  its  own 
fame." 37  Alas,  no!  Big  words  will  guard  no  one's 
fame,  when  unaccompanied  by  big  deeds.  Even 
then,  the  deeds  do  better  alone.  And  when  later, 
sober  thought  had  had  its  opportunity,  the  general 
could  still  write  in  a  confidential  letter  to  a  friend, 
"We  lost  no  honors  at  Chancellorsville."  38 

This  desperate  determination  not  to  admit  fail- 
ure of  course  developed  a  disposition  to  put  what 
blame  there  was  on  to  others.  That  tendency 
did  not  appear  immediately  after  the  battle,  and 
Hooker's  omission  to  make  any  official  report  and 
turn  in  many  of  his  records  has  been  taken  by 
some  to  mean  a  desire  to  avoid  condemning  his 
subordinates,  especially  Howard.  If  so,  his  charity 
lessened  with  time.  When  he  was  anxious  to  be 
summoned  before  the  Committee  on  the  Conduct 
of  the  War,  in  April,  1864,  he  wrote,  "As  it  seems 
to  be  determined  that  I  shall  hold  no  important 
command  hereafter,  it  becomes  necessary  for  me 
to  have  less  care  for  the  future  than  the  past,  so 
far  as  my  professional  character  is  concerned.  In 
my  judgment,  the  record  connected  with  my  com- 
mand of  the  Army  of  the  Potomac  had  better 


54  UNION  PORTRAITS 

be  made  up,  no  matter  who  may  suffer  from  it." 89 
He  helped  make  it  up  with  a  vengeance,  declar- 
ing, in  sober,  sworn  testimony,  that  "there  are  in 
all  armies  officers  [Couch  and  Meade]  more  valiant 
after  the  fight  than  while  it  is  pending;  and  when  a 
truthful  history  of  the  rebellion  shall  be  written,  it 
will  be  found  that  the  Army  of  the  Potomac  is  not 
an  exception";40  and  again,  "Some  of  our  corps 
commanders,  and  also  officers  of  other  rank,  appear 
to  be  unwilling  to  go  into  a  fight;  in  my  judgment 
there  are  not  many  who  really  like  to  fight."  41 
And  this  of  Sedgwick!  While  as  to  his  own, 
Hooker's,  part  in  the  affair  there  is  not  a  word  of 
apology  or  admission  of  error  or  weakness. 

But  all  this  was  later  development.  For  two 
months  after  Chancellorsville  Hooker  continued 
in  command  of  the  army  and  commanded  it  with 
vigor  and  intelligence.  It  might  be  supposed, 
however,  that  experience  would  have  taught  him 
moderation,  if  not  humility.  Apparently  it  did 
not.  In  predicting  a  decisive  battle  to  Butterfield, 
he  declared  that  he  would  "have  every  available 
man  in  the  field,  and  if  Lee  escapes  with  his  army 
the  country  are  entitled  to  and  should  have  my 
head  for  a  football."  42  Evidently  this  is  still  the 
same  tongue  that  wagged  so  joyously  in  the  April 
days  on  the  Rappahannock. 

But  if  Hooker  trusted  himself,  others  did  not 
trust  him.  Halleck's  deep-rooted  prejudice  grew 
daily  stronger  and  spread  to  the  members  of  the 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  55 

Cabinet  and  in  some  measure  even  to  Lincoln.  As 
a  result,  the  general  was  hampered  and  thwarted 
in  a  way  which  would  have  made  success  impossi- 
ble to  a  much  greater  man.  It  is  but  justice  to 
Hooker  to  say  that  in  this  difficult  situation  he 
bore  himself  with  dignity,  and  his  serious  protests 
to  the  President  are  as  modest  as  they  are  reason- 
able. There  should  be  one  commander  with  full 
power,  he  says,  and  adds,  "  I  trust  that  I  may  not 
be  considered  in  the  way  to  this  arrangement,  as  it 
is  a  position  I  do  not  desire,  and  only  suggest  it,  as 
I  feel  the  necessity  for  concert  as  well  as  vigorous 
action/'  43  In  the  same  spirit  he  finally  asked  to  be 
relieved,  feeling  that  the  good  of  the  country,  as 
well  as  justice  to  himself,  demanded  that  some  one 
else,  more  trusted,  should  be  in  his  place. 

When  his  suggestion  was  accepted,  and  Meade 
was  substituted  for  him,  the  fine  side  of  Hooker's 
nature  again  showed  itself  in  the  cordial  courtesy 
with  which  he  greeted  his  successor.44  It  showed 
itself  still  more  in  the  request  that  he  might  be 
put  back  in  command  of  his  old  division  and  so 
continue  service  with  the  army.  And  when  this 
request  is  disregarded,  perhaps  wisely  for  all  con- 
cerned, nay,  even  when  he  is  subjected  to  arrest 
for  the  trivial  offense  of  visiting  Washington  with- 
out a  pass,  he  simply  writes  to  the  President,  with 
all  dignity,  requesting  an  interview  in  which  he 
may  justify  himself  and  set  matters  once  more  on 
the  right  footing  between  them.45 


56  UNION  PORTRAITS 

IV 

In  following  Hooker's  later  career,  in  which 
there  is  undoubtedly  much  to  criticize,  we  must 
always  bear  in  mind  what  he  went  through  during 
those  first  six  months  of  1863.  For  a  man  of  his 
high  and  imperious  spirit  to  have  enjoyed  so  long 
the  supreme  command  of  "  the  finest  army  on  this 
planet,"  to  fail  in  that  command,  and  then  to  be  re- 
duced to  unquestioning  submission  to  men  whom 
he  knew  to  be  his  juniors  and  felt  to  be  his  inferiors, 
was  a  bitter  experience.  Many  who  believe  in  their 
own  genius  never  get  even  one  try  at  greatness; 
but  perhaps  to  get  one  try  and  fail,  and  feel  that 
all  hope  has  utterly  slipped  away,  is  even  harder 
still.  So  it  was  with  Hooker,  and  who  shall  blame 
him  if  at  times  he  grew  restive? 

Nevertheless,  I  believe  that  he  received  his 
orders  to  go  West  with  a  loyal  and  entire  determi- 
nation to  do  his  duty.  According  to  his  view  he 
did  it;  but  it  is  extraordinarily  interesting  to  study 
his  relations  to  the  various  men  with  whom  he 
came  into  contact. 

His  old  habit  of  criticizing  and  fault-finding 
seems  to  have  increased  rather  than  lessened. 
Thus,  he  condemned  freely  the  proceedings  of 
Rosecrans,  which  was  not  unnatural.  But  he 
showed  equal  freedom  in  discussing  the  projects 
of  Grant.  "No  doubt  the  chaos  of  Rosecrans's 
administration  is  as  bad  as  he  describes/'  writes 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  57 

Dana;  "but  he  is  quite  as  truculent  toward  the 
plan  he  is  now  to  execute  as  toward  the  impotence 
and  confusion  of  the  old  regime."  46  The  truculence 
well  appears  in  the  general's  comment  on  orders 
received  from  Grant  in  the  Chattanooga  campaign: 
"I  am  not  permitted  to  advance  unless  I  do  so 
without  fighting  a  battle.  This  puts  me  in  the  con- 
dition of  the  boy  who  was  permitted  to  learn  to 
swim  provided  he  would  not  go  near  the  water."  47 

On  the  other  hand,  Grant,  whether  imbibing  a 
prejudice  from  Halleck,  or  otherwise,  did  not  like 
Hooker.  "Grant  also  wishes  to  have  both  Hooker 
and  Slocum  removed  from  his  command,"  writes 
Dana  again.  "Hooker  has  behaved  badly  ever 
since  his  arrival."  48  There  may  possibly  have 
been  some  misunderstanding  as  to  the  bad  be- 
havior. In  this  connection  there  is  a  curious  in- 
stance of  different  points  of  view.  Immediately 
on  Grant's  appearance  at  Chattanooga,  Hooker, 
whether  from  the  warm  courtesy  of  his  disposition 
or  from  a  desire  to  test  the  attitude  of  his  superior, 
sent  to  invite  him  to  share  his  own  headquarters. 
Howard,  taking  a  sympathetic  view  of  Hooker's 
action,  expresses  surprise  and  regret  at  the  vehe- 
mence of  Grant's  reply: "  If  General  Hooker  wishes 
to  see  me,  he  will  find  me  on  this  train." 49  Wilson, 
in  his  "Life  of  Dana,"  assumes  that  Hooker's 
offer  was  an  impertinence,  and  thinks  the  sharp 
snub  of  Grant  quite  justified.50 

There  are  plenty  of  other  examples  of  Grant's 


58  UNION  PORTRAITS 

state  of  mind  in  regard  to  his  distinguished  subor- 
dinate. In  one  endorsement  he  sneers  at  Hooker's 
report  of  the  number  of  prisoners  captured  as  being 
more  than  that  captured  by  the  whole  army.51 
Elsewhere,  he  suggests  that  it  would  be  well  if 
Hooker  could  be  got  rid  of  altogether.52  But  per- 
haps his  harshest  criticism  is  his  remark  to  Young 
about  the  battle  of  Lookout  Mountain.  "The 
battle  of  Lookout  Mountain  is  one  of  the  romances 
of  the  war/'  he  said.  "There  was  no  such  battle, 
and  no  action  even  worthy  to  be  called  a  battle  on 
Lookout  Mountain.  It  is  all  poetry."  53 

Now,  Lookout  Mountain,  "the  battle  above  the 
clouds,"  is  regarded  by  Hooker's  friends  as  one  of 
his  most  substantial  claims  to  glory.  The  little 
preceding  engagement  of  Wauhatchie  is  indeed 
chiefly  noticeable  because  the  general  came  near 
repeating  there  his  experience  with  Howard  at 
Chancellorsville.  A  piece  of  careless  neglect  was 
prevented  only  by  supreme  energy  from  producing 
disaster.  But  the  taking  of  the  mountain  itself, 
though  the  action  was  not  extensive,  is  held  by 
many  to  have  been  a  skillful  and  brilliant  achieve- 
ment, and  further  to  have  played  a  conspicuous 
part  in  the  success  of  the  entire  battle  of  Chatta- 
nooga, though,  to  be  sure,  a  part  not  contemplated 
in  Grant's  plans  and  therefore,  perhaps,  treated 
by  him  with  scant  commendation. 

It  was  the  same  with  the  Atlanta  campaign 
under  Sherman  as  at  Chattanooga.  Where  there 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  59 

was  fighting,  Hooker  was  always  at  his  best.  He 
got  his  men  into  battle  and  kept  them  there,  either 
to  win,  or,  when  winning  was  sheer  impossibility, 
to  draw  off  slowly,  sullenly,  and  with  terrible  loss. 

But  his  defects,  like  evil  angels,  walked  by  him 
always.  Any  one  who  wishes  to  understand  Hooker 
thoroughly,  all  his  strength  and  all  his  weakness, 
should  not  fail  to  read  his  immensely  long  confi- 
dential letter  to  Chase,  dated  December  28,  1863, 
and  printed  in  the  "  Official  Record  " ; 64  also  that  to 
Stanton,  of  February  25,  1864.55  All  the  enthusi- 
asm is  there,  all  the  intention  of  patriotism,  all  the 
instinct  of  generosity  and  self-sacrifice.  But  there, 
also,  is  the  ever-ready  disposition  to  judge  others 
caustically  and  bitterly,  and  the  fatal  habit  of 
putting  that  judgment  into  hot  and  ill-considered 
words.  And  there,  further,  is  the  most  natural  but 
unfortunate  sensitiveness  springing  from  the  inevi- 
table comparison  of  the  present  with  the  past. 
"Many  of  my  juniors  are  in  the  exercise  of  inde- 
pendent commands,  while  I  am  here  with  more 
rank  piled  on  top  of  me  than  a  man  can  well  stand 
up  under,  with  a  corporal's  guard,  comparatively, 
for  a  command."  56 

In  this  state  of  mind  it  was  hardly  to  be  expected 
that  Hooker  should  work  in  entire  harmony  with 
those  about  him.  He  had,  indeed,  his  own  loyal 
followers,  like  Butterfield,  who  were  always  ready 
to  support  him  with  hand  and  pen.  His  relations 
with  his  immediate  chief,  Thomas,  seem  also  to 


60  UNION  PORTRAITS 

have  been  cordial,  and  Thomas  speaks  of  the 
Lookout  battle  in  very  different  language  from 
Grant.  Of  Howard,  who  so  long  served  under  him, 
Hooker  writes  at  first  with  kindness,  even  with 
enthusiasm,  and  praises  "his  zealous  and  devoted 
service,  not  only  on  the  battlefield,  but  everywhere 
and  at  all  times."  57 

The  record  is  less  agreeable  in  other  cases,  how- 
ever. It  is  hard  to  say  whether  Slocum's  abuse  of 
Hooker  or  Hooker's  of  Slocum  is  more  violent. 
Schurz,  whose  later  testimony  as  to  Chancellors- 
ville  is  so  helpful  to  his  chief,  attacks  him  bitterly, 
and  with  much  apparent  justice,  in  regard  to 
Wauhatchie.  Schofield,  always  diplomatic,  implies 
that  Hooker's  manoeuvres  in  Georgia  were  not 
conducted  with  very  much  reference  to  those  with 
whom  he  should  have  cooperated. 

But  the  chief  figure  in  this  last  act  of  Hooker's 
tragedy  is  Sherman.  Most  of  us  will  recognize  that, 
with  all  Sherman's  charm  and  all  his  vivacity,  it 
must  have  been  a  bitter,  hard  fate  to  serve  under 
him  when  you  did  not  like  him  and  he  did  not  like 
you.  Now,  Hooker  and  Sherman  had  certain 
points  of  resemblance  which  made  it  difficult  for 
them  to  get  along  happily  together,  at  any  rate  in 
official  relations.  From  the  first  there  was  ill- 
feeling/ between  them  which  showed  in  curious 
littje/ways,  as  in  the  story  of  their  both  coming 
^finder  a  hot  fire  and  refusing  to  budge,  though  all 
their  staff,  and  even  the  imperturbable  Thomas, 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  61 

had  retreated,  simply  because  neither  was  willing 
to  stir  a  foot  before  the  other. 

That  Hooker  deserves  a  share  of  the  blame  for 
this  unfortunate  state  of  things  cannot  be  doubted. 
But  how  much?  Let  us  consider  first  the  enthusias- 
tic evidence  of  Colonel  Stone:  "Hooker's  faults 
were  sufficiently  apparent;  but  from  the  day  this 
campaign  opened,  I  had  daily  intercourse  with 
him,  and  no  more  subordinate  or  obedient  officer 
served  in  this  army.  No  matter  how  unwelcome 
an  order  he  received,  or  the  time  he  received  it, 
he  was  the  only  one  who  invariably  obeyed  it 
promptly,  cheerfully,  ungrudgingly.  And  I  saw 
him  at  all  hours,  —  day,  dawn,  and  midnight, 
morning  and  evening,  —  and  never  when  he  was 
not  ready  and  anxious  to  do  his  whole  duty/'  58 

This  is  delightful  testimony  as  to  deeds,  the  hand ; 
but  words,  the  tongue,  you  remember  what  it  had 
been  while  Hooker  was  with  the  Army  of  the 
Potomac.  In  the  essential  letter  to  Chase,  above 
referred  to,  written  before  the  Atlanta  campaign 
began,  Hooker  said:  "Sherman  is  an  active,  ener- 
getic officer,  but  in  judgment  is  as  infirm  as  Burn- 
side.  He  will  never  be  successful.  Please  remem- 
ber what  I  tell  you/'  59  That  he  expressed  these 
opinions,  in  season  and  out  of  season,  where  they 
were  sure  to  do  him  more  injury  than  his  com- 
mander, is  absolutely  proved  by  the  extraordinary 
letter  of  warning  written  by  Hooker's  nearest 
friend  and  supporter,  Butterfield.  No  more  admir- 


62  UNION  PORTRAITS 

able  and  more  really  friendly  words  were  ever 
addressed  by  inferior  to  superior:  "You  should 
not  speak  in  the  presence  of  others  as  you  did  in 
my  presence  and  that  of  Colonel  Wood  to-day, 
regarding  General  Sherman  and  his  operations.  .  .  . 
I  am  talking  as  a  friend  to  you.  What  I  have 
stated  above  is  substantially  charged  against  you 
with  regard  to  both  McClellan  and  Burnside. 
Don't  give  these  accusations  further  weight  by 
remarks  concerning  Sherman.  ...  I  know  how 
hard  it  is  for  you  to  conceal  your  honest  opinions. 
.  .  .  These  opinions  travel  as  'Hooker's  opinions/ 
Your  own  staff  are  impregnated  with  them,  and 
you  will  be  accused  in  future  by  any  officer,  serving 
under  you,  who  may  fall  under  your  censure,  with 
verbal  insubordination.  .  .  .  You  never  were,  nor 
never  will  be  a  politic  man,  .  .  .  but  you  must  be 
guarded.  It  will  be  charged  by  evil-disposed  per- 
sons that  you  are  ambitious  to  fill  Sherman's  place 
—  not  in  your  hearing  or  mine  —  but  it  is  the  way 
of  the  world,  and  will  be  said."  60  However  But- 
terfield  may  be  judged  in  general,  who  of  us  would 
not  esteem  himself  fortunate  to  have  a  friend  who 
would  speak  like  that?  And  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
the  toleration  of  such  free  speech  from  any  friend 
is  evidence  of  fine  qualities  in  Hooker  himself. 

But  it  did  no  good.  Perhaps  it  never  does.  Sher- 
man disliked  the  words  so  much  that  he  became 
very  mistrustful  of  the  deeds.  He  had  a  tongue 
of  his  own  and  he  lashed  Hooker  with  it,  as  if  he 


JOSEPH  HOOKER  63 

were  a  schoolboy,  and  then  naively  explained  that 
he  had  said  less  than  the  occasion  demanded.  He 
had  his  bitter,  unworthy  sarcasms,  also,  as  when 
Hooker  dilated  on  his  men  lost  and  Sherman 
sneered,  "  Oh,  most  of  'em  will  be  back  in  a  day 
or  two."  61  Finally,  when  McPherson  was  killed, 
Sherman  put  Howard  over  Hooker's  head  into 
the  vacant  place. 

This  was  too  much  and  Hooker  asked  to  be 
relieved.  It  was  a  mistake,  of  course.  He  was 
thinking  about  his  dignity.  A  man  always  makes 
a  mistake  when  he  thinks  about  his  dignity.  He 
should  think  about  his  work,  and  let  others,  or,  by 
thinking  about  his  work,  make  others,  think  about 
his  dignity.  But  Hooker  was  no  more  perfect  in 
this  respect  than  the  rest  of  us.  Therefore,  the 
soldier  who  was  noted  for  fighting  spent  the  last 
year  of  the  war  in  the  safe  West,  where  there  was 
no  fighting,  only  petty  intrigue,  and  newspaper 
riots,  and  police  duty  generally.  But  he  was  the 
same  old  Hooker  still.  Read  the  huge  letter  in 
which  he  foams  and  rages  to  Stanton  over  a 
rumored  change  of  his  headquarters  and  Stan- 
ton's  quiet  snub  in  three  lines:  "No  order  has  been 
made  or  contemplated  transferring  headquarters 
of  Northern  Department  to  Columbus.  News- 
papers are  not  very  good  authority  for  the  action 
of  this  Department."  62 

So  he  was  a  thoroughly  human  figure,  interesting 
to  study  because  of  the  intense  humanity  in  his 


64  UNION  PORTRAITS 

very  faults  and  mistakes  and  failures.  He  was  not 
much  besides  a  soldier;  and  even  as  a  soldier  he  was 
not  quite  so  brilliant  as  he  thought  he  was,  be- 
ing apparently  unequal  to  independent  command. 
Yet  he  played  a  not  undistinguished  part  in  the 
greatest  drama  of  American  history,  and  with  all 
his  faults  there  was  something  about  him  of  the 
heroic  stamp,  something  of  the  boyish,  prating, 
blustering,  panic-harboring,  death-defying  heroes 
of  the  Iliad.  When  I  gaze  upon  Massachusetts^ 
splendid  tribute  to  him,  I  think,  not  of  the  weak- 
nesses, but  of  the  fighting  at  Williamsburg,  and 
Antietam,  and  in  Georgia,  and  even  more  of  the 
prayer  to  be  given  his  old  division  back  again;  of 
the  remark  about  Howard,  "His  offense  to  me  was 
forgotten  when  he  acknowledged  it"; 63  best  of  all, 
of  the  frank  admission  to  Doubleday,  as  to  Chan- 
cellorsville,  more  heroic  than  any  fighting:  "Dou- 
bleday, I  was  not  hurt  by  a  shell,  and  I  was  not 
drunk.  For  once  I  lost  confidence  in  Hooker,  and 
that  is  all  there  is  to  it."  64 

What  man  could  desire  a  finer  epitaph  than 
Lincoln's  words  —  and  Lincoln  knew  his  subor- 
dinate well:  "When  trouble  arises  I  can  always 
rely  on  Hooker's  magnanimity."  M 


Ill 

GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Cadiz,  Spain,  December  31, 1815. 

Entered  West  Point,  1831. 

Graduated,  1835. 

Resigned  from  army,  1836. 

Married  Margaretta  Sergeant,  December  31, 1840. 

Reentered  army,  1842. 

1846,  1847,  Mexican  War. 

1856,  captain  of  Topographical  Engineers. 

August  31,  1861,  brigadier-general  of  volunteers. 

During  1862  prominent  fighter  in  Army  of  Potomac. 

June  28,  1863,  became  commander  of  Army  of  Potomac. 

July  1,  2,  3, 1863,  fought  Gettysburg. 

Till  spring  of  1864  commanded  Army  of  Potomac. 

Till  end  of  war  commanded  Army  of  Potomac  under  Grant 

as  general-in-chief . 

Made  major-general  in  regular  army,  February  1,  1865. 
After  war  commanded  various  military  departments. 
Died,  November  6,  1872. 


Ill 

GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE 
I 

THE  name  of  George  Gordon  Meade  will  always 
be  a  prominent  one  in  American  history.  Every 
American  knows  that  Meade  commanded  at 
Gettysburg  and  that  if  Gettysburg  did  not  end  the 
war,  it  at  least  checked  Lee  and  his  victorious 
army  in  the  full  march  of  triumph  so  decisively 
that  they  never  again  ventured  on  vigorous  offen- 
sive action. 

Also,  the  circumstances  of  Meade's  leadership  at 
Gettysburg  much  increase  his  claim  to  admiration 
and  gratitude.  To  take  an  unsuccessful  army  from 
an  unsuccessful  commander  and  three  days  after 
to  win  a  victory  over  troops  like  Lee's  under  a 
general  like  Lee  was  a  task  that  demanded  most 
distinguished  qualities  of  soldiership.  This  task 
was  imposed  upon  Meade  against  his  wish;  but  he 
accepted  it  and  showed  courage  and  character  and 
brains  thoroughly  adequate  to  the  occasion. 

Yet  he  remains  one  of  the  secondary  figures  of 
the  war.  Men  remember  anecdotes  and  phrases 
and  experiences  of  Grant  and  Sherman  and  Sheri- 
dan. Of  Meade  they  know  nothing  but  the  name. 
Though  nominally  in  command  of  the  Army  of  the 


68  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Potomac  until  the  end,  at  the  great  historic  scene 
of  Appomattox  he  was  not  even  present.  As  a 
person  he  is  hazy,  hardly  distinguished  from  the 
multitude.  It  is  of  extreme  interest  to  study  the 
causes  of  this  neglect  in  the  nature  of  the  man;  and 
the  delightful  material  now  supplied  in  abundance 
by  the  general's  recently  published  "Life  and 
Letters"  makes  such  a  study  as  easy  as  it  is 
profitable. 

The  course  of  Meade's  whole  biography  is 
clearly  elucidated  in  this  ample  chronicle,  his 
faithful  effort  at  West  Point,  where  he  was  gradu- 
ated in  1835,  at  the  age  of  nineteen,  his  patient 
labor  in  his  vocation  of  engineering,  his  creditable 
service  in  the  Mexican  War,  his  steady  advance 
in  the  Army  of  the  Potomac  until  he  reached  its 
leadership,  and  the  eclipse  of  that  leadership  under 
Grant  during  the  last  year  of  the  war.  Meade's 
admirable  letters,  chiefly  addressed  to  his  wife, 
reflect  all  his  daily  experience,  his  triumphs  and 
successes  as  well  as  failure  and  discouragement  and 
disappointment. 

The  careful  study  of  these  records,  in  connection 
with  other  testimony,  shows  many  qualities  that 
were  calculated  to  lead  to  success.  In  the  first 
place  there  was  a  sane  and  healthy  desire  for  it.  It 
is  evident  that  Meade,  like  other  normal  men, 
longed  passionately  to  get  on  in  the  profession  he 
had  adopted.  "  In  military  matters,  as  in  all  things 
else,"  he  says,  "success  is  the  criterion  by  which 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       69 

men  are  judged."  l  When  he  feels  that  he  has 
chosen  the  wrong  path  and  has  missed  some  golden 
opportunity,  his  regret  is  bitter.  "  I  tremble  some- 
times when  I  think  what  I  might  have  been,  and 
remember  what  I  am,  when  I  reflect  on  what  I  might 
have  accomplished  if  I  had  only  devoted  all  my  time 
and  energies  to  one  object,  an  object  where  my 
exertions  would  have  told  in  my  advancement/'  * 
On  the  brink  of  a  great  struggle  he  inspires  himself 
with  the  thought  of  what  victory  will  bring.  "  I  go 
into  the  action  to-day  as  the  commander  of  an 
army  corps.  If  I  survive,  my  two  stars  are  secure, 
and  if  I  fall,  you  will  have  my  reputation  to  live 
on."  3  And  he  has  a  clear  and  sober  consciousness 
of  having  deserved  such  promotion  as  is  likely  to 
come  to  him.  "  If  most  faithful  attention  to  those 
duties  for  nearly  a  year  preceding,  and  activity  and 
energy  such  as  (though  I  say  it  myself)  have  at- 
tracted attention  from  various  officers,  entitles  me 
to  the  advancement  of  one  grade,  .  .  .  then  I  can 
safely  appeal  to  my  brother-officers  for  my  creden- 
tials in  this  case."  4 

And  the  natural  corollary  of  ambition,  sensitive-* 
ness  at  being  unduly  postponed  to  others,  is  by  no 
means  wanting.  A  great  clamor  was  raised  before 
Antietam  over  Reynolds's  removal,  which  put 
Meade  in  Reynolds's  place  as  commander  of  the 
division  of  Pennsylvania  Reserves.  Meade,  there- 
upon, hotly  protested  that  the  urgency  to  have 
Reynolds  back  was  a  slight  to  him  and  that  if 


70  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Reynolds  came  he  should  insist  on  being  relieved. 
The  analysis  of  Meade's  state  of  mind  during  the 
last  year  of  the  war,  when  Grant  and  Sheridan  were 
crowding  him  out  of  public  notice,  is  of  extreme 
interest.  Recognizing  always,  with  inherent  mag- 
nanimity, the  fine  qualities  of  both  generals,  never 
uttering  one  word  of  public  protest,  he  yet  shows 
clearly,  to  his  intimate  correspondent,  the  keen 
susceptibility  he  cannot  overcome.  "You  may 
look  now  for  the  Army  of  the  Potomac  putting 
laurels  on  the  brows  of  another  rather  than  your 
husband."  5  When  at  last,  after  the  war,  the 
supreme  military  honor  is  awarded  to  Sheridan 
instead  of  to  himself,  his  sense  of  justice  revolts  in 
language  which  shows  how  deep  was  the  disap- 
pointment: "My  own  sweet  love,  you  can  imagine 
the  force  of  this  blow,  but ...  we  must  find  con- 
solation in  the  consciousness  .  .  .  that  it  is  the 
cruelest  and  meanest  act  of  injustice,  and  the  hope, 
if  there  is  any  sense  of  wrong  or  justice  in  the 
country,  that  the  man  who  perpetrated  it  will 
some  day  be  made  to  feel  so."  6 

On  the  other  hand,  what  is  most  winning  about 
Meade's  ambition  and  desire  for  success  is  the 
moderation  and  perfect  candor  that  temper  it. 
Cheap  notoriety,  the  current  advertising  of  the 
newspapers,  he  detests  and  will  make  no  effort  to 
obtain  it  or  cater  to  it.  Hasty  promotion,  reward 
beyond  his  deserts,  he  does  not  desire,  rather  dep- 
recates it,  as  bringing  later  mortification  and  re- 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE      71 

gret.  Even  when  things  seem  to  be  going  against 
him,  he  recognizes  that  it  is  the  fortune  of  war. 
"I  don't  mean  to  say  I  have  not  been  badly 
treated,  but  I  do  mean  to  say  I  might  have  been 
much  worse  treated,  and  that  my  present  status 
is  not  without  advantages  and  does  not  justify  my 
being  discontented."  7  What  could  be  nobler  than 
his  attitude  on  the  first  advent  of  Grant?  "I 
believe  Grant  is  honest  and  fair,  and  I  have  no 
doubt  he  will  give  me  full  credit  for  anything  I 
may  do,  and  if  I  don't  deserve  any,  I  don't  desire 
it."  8  While  no  man  ever  expressed  personal  ambi- 
tion more  finely  than  this  quiet  soldier  in  the  early 
days  of  his  campaigning;  "  I  hope  the  people  of  the 
country  will  appreciate  what  we  have  done,  and  for 
myself  individually,  if  I  get  the  approbation  of  those 
in  whose  hearts  I  wish  to  live,  it  is  all  that  I  ask."9 
Also,  Meade  had  other  qualities  that  make  for 
greatness  more  substantially  than  the  mere  desire 
to  attain  it.  He  had  everywhere  and  always  the 
deepest  sense  of  duty.  When  there  was  work  to  be 
done,  he  was  ready  to  do  it,  no  matter  how  un- 
savory or  distasteful.  Grant  bears  witness  to  his 
subordinate's  unfailing  earnestness  and  he  adds 
further  that  Meade  was  able  to  take  the  plan  of 
another,  even  when  he  did  not  approve  of  it,  and 
carry  it  out  as  zealously  as  if  it  were  his  own. 
Those  who  have  made  some  study  of  the  history  of 
the  war,  North  and  South,  will  appreciate  how  rare 
a  quality  this  was. 


72  UNION  PORTRAITS 

And  with  the  instinct  of  duty  went  that  of  sac- 
rifice. He  would  sacrifice  private  feeling.  Even 
when  his  child  was  dying,  he  was  unwilling  to  leave 
his  post.  He  would  sacrifice  public  advancement. 
"Sedgwick  and  Meade,"  says  Grant,  "were  men  so 
finely  formed  that  if  ordered  to  resign  their  gen- 
eral's commissions  and  take  service  as  corporals, 
they  would  have  fallen  into  the  ranks  without  a 
murmur/' 10  And  he  goes  on  to  relate  how  Meade 
came  to  him,  when  he  came  East,  and  offered  to 
give  up  his  position  to  any  other  officer  that  Grant 
might  prefer. 

How  deeply  this  instinct  of  duty  and  sacrifice  was 
founded  in  patriotism  is  understood  when  we  read 
what  Meade  has  to  say  about  his  failure  to  attack 
Lee  after  Gettysburg  and  again  at  Mine  Run.  His 
military  judgment  may  have  been  at  fault  in  one 
or  both  of  these  cases,  but  at  least  his  determina- 
tion not  to  be  driven  from  what  he  thought  right 
by  any  storm  of  popular  clamor  is  forever  admir- 
able and  to  be  imitated.  His  own  expression  of  this 
is  so  fine  that  I  quote  it  at  length:  "It  will  be 
proved  as  clear  as  the  light  of  day,  that  an  attack 
was  perfectly  practicable,  and  that  every  one, 
except  myself,  in  the  army,  particularly  the  sol- 
diers, was  dying  for  it,  and  that  I  had  some  myste- 
rious object  in  view,  either  in  connection  with  poli- 
tics, or  stock-jobbing,  or  something  else  about  as 
foreign  to  my  thought,  and  finally  the  Administra- 
tion will  be  obliged  to  yield  to  popular  clamor  and 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       73 

discard  me.  For  all  that  I  am  prepared,  fortified  as 
I  said  before  by  a  clear  conscience,  and  the  con- 
viction that  I  have  acted  from  a  high  sense  of  duty, 
to  myself  as  a  soldier,  to  my  men  as  their  general, 
and  to  my  country  and  its  cause,  .  .  .  having  its 
vital  interests  solemnly  entrusted  to  me,  which  I 
have  no  right  wantonly  to  play  with  and  to  jeop- 
ardize for  my  own  personal  benefit,  or  to  satisfy 
the  demands  of  popular  clamor,  or  interested  poli- 
ticians/' u 

II 

In  addition  to  these  qualities  of  moral  character 
which  are  certainly  helpful  to  greatness,  Meade 
had  intelligence  of  a  high  order.  His  mind  was 
perhaps  not  so  vividly  and  restlessly  active  as 
Sherman's;  but  it  was  far  better  balanced.  It  was 
perfectly  capable  of  sympathy  with  all  sides  and 
with  all  interests  of  life.  Though  his  early  and 
constant  preoccupation  with  practical  matters 
left  him  little  time  for  purely  intellectual  pursuits, 
it  is  evident  that  he  turned  to  such  pursuits  by 
natural  instinct.  In  one  of  his  letters  he  expresses 
deep  regret  at  being  cut  off  from  the  enjoyment  of 
music.12  In  another  he  shows  genuine  literary 
sense  by  his  criticism  of  the  detestable  jingle  of 
Lytton's  "Lucile,"  then  running  its  brief  course 
of  popularity.13 

In  everything  relating  to  the  practical  affairs 
of  life,  the  calm  lucidity,  the  broad  balance  of 


74  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Meade's  intellect  make  themselves  constantly  and 
gratefully  felt.  When  decision  is  needed,  he  is 
always  ready  to  decide.  There  is  no  doubt  or 
questioning  when  doubt  and  questioning  are  out  of 
place.  Thus,  though  he  disapproved  totally  of  the 
Mexican  War  from  a  political  point  of  view,  he 
felt  that,  once  in,  we  should  prosecute  it  with  all 
the  energy  of  which  the  nation  was  capable.  "Let 
us  show  a  bold  and  united  front,  forget  party  for 
an  instant;  now  that  we  are  in  the  war,  prosecute 
it  with  all  possible  vigor,  not  in  talk  but  in  acts; 
...  let  [Mexico]  see  we  are  determined  to  carry 
everything  before  us;  and  you  may  rest  assured 
that  if  she  is  ever  going  to  make  peace,  she  will  do 
it  then,  and  not  till  then."  14  Yet  this  zeal  and 
efficiency  in  action  are  always  tempered  by  a 
really  remarkable  power  of  rising  above  the  imme- 
diate present,  of  seeing  things  in  their  larger  as- 
pects and  their  manifold  phases,  of  recognizing  the 
good  intention  and  earnest  purpose  of  an  adver- 
sary, even  when  you  are  opposing  him  with  all 
your  might.  No  man  fought  the  Civil  War  with 
steadier  conviction  than  Meade.  But  no  man 
showed  a  larger  or  more  sympathetic  tolerance  and 
charity  before  the  war  and  during  it  and  after  it. 
So  in  military  matters,  what  distinguishes 
Meade  above  everything  else,  and  gives  him  his 
enduring  claim  to  respect,  is  brains.  It  may  be 
remarked  that  this  was  the  claim  of  Moltke,  also, 
who  is  considered  to  have  been  something  of  a 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       75 

general.  It  was  not  that  Meade  had  a  vivid 
and  fertile  imagination,  but  he  saw  possibilities, 
weighed  them,  and  adopted  or  rejected  them  on 
all  their  merits.  He  was  "not  original  in  devising 
brilliant  plans,"  says  Colonel  W.  R.  Livermore; 
"but  his  clear  understanding  enabled  him  to  dis- 
criminate between  the  plans  of  others."  16 

Of  course  intelligence,  disproportionately  de- 
veloped, has  its  grave  military  dangers.  It  is  not 
always  well  to  see  all  the  possibilities  too  clearly. 
Meade  himself,  with  that  gift  we  all  have  of  sooner 
or  later  defining  ourselves,  says  somewhere,  "I  am 
a  juste  milieu  man."  16  Now  a  juste  milieu  man, 
one  who  keeps  the  middle  of  the  traveled  road, 
sometimes  balances  too  well,  sometimes  errs  by 
excess  of  caution,  sometimes  hesitates  to  take  the 
chances  which  one  blinder  or  less  far-seeing  would 
take  in  ignorance  and  come  out  with  dazzling 
triumph.  It  was  this  weakness,  if  it  was  a  weak- 
ness, which  induced  Meade  to  provide  for  the  pos- 
sibility of  retreat  from  Gettysburg  and  kept  him 
from  attacking  after  the  battle,  this  which  pre- 
vented him  from  pursuing  Lee  with  the  headlong 
vigor  which  the  nation  demanded,  this  which,  in 
October,  1863,  brought  upon  him  the  reproach  of 
Halleck  and  the  pleading  of  Lincoln.  "If  General 
Meade  can  now  attack  him  [Lee]  on  a  field  no 
more  than  equal  for  us,"  wrote  the  President, 
"and  will  do  so  with  all  the  skill  and  courage 
which  he,  his  officers,  and  men  possess,  the  honor 


76  UNION  PORTRAITS 

will  be  his,  if  he  succeeds,  and  the  blame  may  be 
mine,  if  he  fails."  17 

To  this  appeal  Meade  answered,  "It  has  been 
my  intention  to  attack  the  enemy,  if  I  can  find 
him  on  a  field  no  more  than  equal  for  us,  and  that 
I  have  only  delayed  doing  so  from  the  difficulty  of 
ascertaining  his  exact  position,  and  the  fear  that 
in  endeavoring  to  do  so  my  communications  might 
be  jeopardized."  18  It  may  be  that  too  keen  intelli- 
gence in  the  apprehension  of  possibilities  here  did 
the  general  an  injury,  but  I  repeat  he  at  least 
showed  courage  in  acting  on  his  own  judgment 
alone  and  not  surrendering  it  to  any  pressure  from 
others. 

Also  there  are  those  who  believe  that  that  judg- 
ment was  usually  correct,  and  who  agree  with 
General  Hunt  as  to  Gettysburg  in  particular. 
" He  was  right  in  his  orders  as  to  Pipe  Creek;  right, 
in  his  determination  under  certain  circumstances 
to  fall  back  to  it;  right,  in  pushing  up  to  Gettys- 
burg after  the  battle;  right,  in  remaining  there; 
right,  in  not  attempting  to  counter-attack  at  any 
stage  of  the  battle;  right,  as  to  his  pursuit  of 
Lee."  19  In  the  opinion  of  these  critics,  at  any 
rate,  it  has  never  yet  been  shown  and  never  can 
be  shown  that,  if  Meade  had  been  supported  as 
Grant  was  and  supplied  as  Grant  was,  he  would 
not  have  accomplished  quite  as  much  as  Grant. 

What  is  most  of  all  attractive  about  Meade's 
Intellectual  make-up  is  his  absolute  candor.  There 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       77 

is  no  bluff,  no  swagger,  no  pretension,  no  attempt 
to  throw  dust  in  the  eyes  of  posterity.  He  debates 
and  analyzes  his  own  mistakes  just  as  freely  and 
frankly  as  he  would  those  of  another.  And  when 
one  has  read  thousands  of  pages  of  self -justification 
by  great  commanders  on  both  sides,  one  appreci- 
ates how  rare  such  candor  is.  Take  this  admirable 
passage  from  the  official  report  of  the  Mine  Run 
campaign,  in  which  the  general  discusses  the  argu- 
ments for  and  against  his  own  conduct  as  calmly 
and  earnestly  as  if  he  were  pleading  in  the  naked, 
quiet  chamber  of  his  conscience:  "It  may  be  said 
that  I  should  not  depend  on  the  judgment  of 
others,  but  it  is  impossible  a  commanding  general 
can  reconnoitre  in  person  a  line  of  over  seven  miles 
in  extent,  and  act  on  his  own  judgment  as  to  the 
expediency  of  attacking  or  not.  Again,  it  may  be 
said  that  the  effort  should  have  been  made  to  test 
the  value  of  my  judgment,  or,  in  other  words,  that 
I  should  encounter  what  I  believed  to  be  certain 
defeat,  so  as  to  prove  conclusively  that  victory 
was  impossible.  Considering  how  sacred  is  the 
trust  of  the  lives  of  the  brave  men  under  my  com- 
mand, but  willing  as  I  am  to  shed  their  blood  and 
my  own  where  duty  requires,  and  my  judgment 
dictates  that  the  sacrifice  will  not  be  in  vain,  I 
cannot  be  a  party  to  a  wanton  slaughter  of  my 
troops  for  any  mere  personal  end."  20 


78  UNION  PORTRAITS 

III 

With  these  great  moral  and  intellectual  quali- 
ties, which  should  have  insured  success  and  glory, 
Meade  unfortunately  combined  some  others  that 
were  less  helpful.  These  latter  were  not  in  them- 
selves all  positive  defects,  indeed  very  much  the 
contrary.  Some  of  them  were  the  most  charming 
elements  in  the  general's  character  and  remind  one 
forcibly  of  the  words  of  Shakespeare,  — 

"There  is  a  sort  of  men 
Whose  graces  serve  them  but  as  enemies." 

For  instance,  all  through  Meade's  career  we  find 
a  singular  modesty,  almost  amounting  to  self- 
distrust,  and  this,  I  assure  you,  is  a  trait  so  rare  in 
Civil  War  history  as  to  attract  attention  and  ad- 
miration at  once.  I  have  now  spent  fifteen  years  in 
the  study  of  these  practical  natures  who  did  things, 
either  in  war  or  statesmanship,  and  I  begin  posi- 
tively to  thirst  for  spirits  of  another  type.  The 
achievement  of  great  matters  brings  out  splendid 
qualities,  keen  insight,  quick  decision,  the  neglect 
of  slight  things  for  what  is  truly  essential.  But  it 
also  develops  and  necessarily  requires  a  self- 
confidence  which,  repeated  in  a  thousand  vari- 
ous phases,  becomes  intolerably  wearisome.  The 
highest  order  of  genius,  Lincoln's  or  Lee's,  can  do 
things  without  this  self-assurance;  but  in  greater 
or  less  degree  it  is  apt  to  permeate  practical  minds 
of  a  narrower  type. 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE      79 

Now  Meade  was  as  modest  as  Lincoln  or  Lee, 
and  in  his  position  excessive  modesty  kept  him  out 
of  the  public  view  and  gave  others  much  less 
deserving  a  chance  to  elbow  past  him  in  the  race 
for  honor. 

Not  that  Meade  was  without  a  due  pride  and 
just  sense  of  the  value  of  his  ability  and  achieve- 
ments. In  the  midst  of  later  disappointment  and 
discouragement,  his  heart  thrills  when  he  thinks 
of  Gettysburg.  Even  his  enemies,  he  says,  ac- 
knowledge that  Gettysburg  was  one  of  the  greatest 
victories  the  world  has  ever  seen,  though  some  of 
them  believe  it  would  have  been  greater  if  he  had 
not  been  there.  And  he  frankly  declares  that,  "as 
I  reflect  on  that  eventful  period,  and  all  that  has 
elapsed  since,  I  have  reason  to  be  satisfied  with 
my  course,  and  cause  to  be  most  thankful.  The 
longer  this  war  continues  the  more  will  Gettysburg 
and  its  results  be  appreciated."  21 

Nor  was  he  inclined  to  underrate  himself  as 
compared  with  others.  He  playfully  deprecates 
his  wife's  enthusiasm,  declaring  that  he  is  no  more 
than  a  common  soldier  doing  his  duty;  yet,  lest  she 
should  take  him  too  closely  at  his  word,  he  adds 
with  just  and  manly  dignity,  "One  thing,  however, 
I  am  willing  to  admit,  and  that  is,  that  I  consider 
myself  as  good  as  most  of  my  neighbors  and  with- 
out great  vanity  may  say  that  I  believe  myself  to 
be  better  than  some  who  are  much  higher." 

But  no  man  was  more  ready  to  admit  his  own 


80  UNION  PORTRAITS 

deficiencies.  As  we  have  seen  above,  when  he 
failed  he  did  not  waste  a  moment  forging  excuses 
or  unloading  blame  on  to  others.  He  went  right 
straight  to  the  causes  of  failure  and  if  he  found  them 
in  himself,  he  said  so.  When  he  receives  honorable 
mention,  he  notes  that  there  is  a  great  deal  of  acci- 
dent about  it  and  that  many  who  missed  it  have 
done  quite  as  much  as  he.  When  he  is  put  forward 
prominently  as  the  victor  of  Gettysburg,  he  points 
out  that  chance  has  its  mighty  share  in  all  great 
victories  and  that  he  had  better  abstain  from 
bragging  until  his  future  is  more  secure.  And  I 
have  met  with  few  commanders  on  either  side  who 
could  have  penned  the  simple  sentence  in  which 
he  recounts  one  of  his  adventures  with  Lee.  "This 
was  a  deep  game,  and  I  am  free  to  admit  that  in 
the  playing  of  it  he  has  got  the  advantage  of  me."  22 
Finest  of  all,  as  illustrating  this  natural  instinct 
of  self -distrust,  is  Meade's  shrinking  from  supreme 
command.  Everywhere  one  finds  men  hurt  and 
injured  because  not  entrusted  with  positions  equal 
to  their  merits;  but  the  instances  of  those  who  had 
rank  enough  and  feared  more  are  rare  indeed. 
Meade  was  certainly  one  of  them.  It  is  not  only 
that  he  balked  when  the  command  of  the  Army  of 
the  Potomac  was  actually  thrust  upon  him.  The 
boldest  might  have  done  that  under  the  circum- 
stances. But  months  before  he  writes  to  his  wife 
in  the  most  intimate  frankness  of  self -confession: 
"Your  anxiety  lest  I  should  be  placed  in  command 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       81 

of  the  army  causes  me  to  smile.  Still,  I  must  con- 
fess when  such  men  as  Gibbon  say  it  is  talked 
about,  it  really  does  look  serious  and  alarming;  yet, 
when  I  look  back  on  the  good  fortune  which  has 
thus  far  attended  my  career,  I  cannot  believe  so 
sudden  a  change  for  the  worse  can  occur  as  would 
happen  if  I  were  placed  in  command."  23  The  ab- 
solute sincerity  of  this  cannot  be  questioned,  and 
I  say  that  to  turn  to  it  from  the  loud  petulance  of 
so  many  who  are  eager  to  better  themselves  is  like 
stepping  from  the  clatter  of  cities  into  the  quiet  of 
green  fields. 

And  as  he  was  too  modest  to  thrust  himself  into 
the  glare  of  glory,  so  Meade  had  another  grace 
inimical  to  the  greatest  success  of  a  soldier:  he  was 
a  lover  of  peace.  It  is  worth  noting  that  none  of 
the  men  of  the  very  first  rank  on  either  side  in  the 
war  were  of  the  roaring,  swash-buckler  type,  which 
prates  about  the  pleasure  of  fighting  in  itself. 
Grant  and  Thomas,  Lee  and  the  two  Johnstons 
were  quiet  gentlemen.  Sherman  was  certainly  not 
quiet,  but  he  was  anything  but  a  boisterous  roarer. 
And  so  far  Meade  is  in  excellent  company.  But 
he  differed  from  all  these  I  have  named  in  that  he 
took  little  or  no  pleasure  in  his  profession,  in  fact 
found  it  positively  distasteful  in  most  of  its  aspects. 
"He  was  not  a  soldier  by  instinct,"  says  Colonel 
W.  R.  Livermore,24  and  only  repeats  what  Meade 
was  constantly  saying  himself. 

Understand  me.  I  do  not  for  a  moment  suggest 


82  UNION  PORTRAITS 

anything  so  absurd  as  that  Meade  was  lacking  in 
personal  courage.  He  had  probably  as  high  moral 
control  over  his  nerves  as  a  man  of  such  sensitive 
temperament  ever  possessed.  Splendid  stories  are 
told  of  his  coolness  in  action  and  by  some  who  were 
not  favorable  to  him.  Read  Butterfield's  account 
of  the  general's  sitting  quietly,  at  the  crisis  of 
Gettysburg,  with  the  shells  bursting  all  about  him, 
telling  stories  to  the  young  officers  of  his  early 
adventures  and  experiences.  "The  world  might 
naturally  suppose  that  with  the  immense  responsi- 
bility so  suddenly  placed  upon  him  unsought  and 
unexpected,  Meade  might  have  been  a  trifle  nerv- 
ous or  excited.  If  he  was,  he  never  betrayed  it."  26 
Read,  again,  Horace  Porter's  description  of  the 
general  in  battle,  his  sharp,  ringing  orders,  his  in- 
tense energy  of  courage  and  movement,  his  quick 
comprehension  of  the  conduct  of  all  his  subordi- 
nates and  intelligent  adjustment  of  their  actions  to 
each  other. 

Yet,  if  you  examine  his  heart  carefully,  as  it  is 
laid  bare  in  the  long  process  of  his  correspondence, 
you  will  agree  with  Colonel  Livermore  that  he  was 
not  a  soldier  by  instinct.  Why,  even  at  the  begin- 
ning he  went  to  West  Point  as  it  were  accidentally 
and  against  his  inclination.  He  had  none  of  the 
drum-and-fife  fever  which  makes  so  many  boys 
soldiers  before  they  know  it.  He  was  a  thinker,  a 
scholar.  The  drill  at  the  Academy,  the  endless 
repetition  of  technique,  indispensable  but  monot- 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       83 

onous,  bored  him  unspeakably.  He  longed  to  be 
out  of  the  army  before  he  was  fairly  in  it.  Years 
later,  in  Mexico,  he  enlarges  with  energetic  disgust 
on  the  same  tedious  features  of  actual  military  life. 
"A  camp  where  is  no  active  service  is  a  dull  and 
stupid  place,  nothing  but  drill  and  parades,  and 
your  ears  filled  all  day  with-drumming  and  fifeing. 
All  this  is  very  pretty  for  such  as  have  never  seen 
it,  but  fifteen  years  of  such  business  takes  off  the 
edge  of  novelty."  26 

He  was  delicate  in  health,  too,  and  the  hardships 
of  camp  life  were  a  trial  to  him.  He  bore  them  with- 
out complaint,  but  he  grew  infinitely  tired  of  them. 
"Do  not  be  frightened  about  me,  but  the  sight  of 
two  gentlemen  so  sick,  with  no  friendly  hand  near 
them,  no  accommodation  of  any  kind  whatever  in  a 
flimsy  tent,  made  me  feel  badly,  not  only  for  them, 
but  for  myself,  in  anticipation  of  being  similarly 
situated.  Still,  I  trust  I  shall  keep  well,  and  if  tak- 
ing care  of  myself  will  do  it,  I  am  certain  of  it."  * 
He  does  not  seem  much  exhilarated  with  the  enthu- 
siasm of  a  soldier's  career,  does  he?  And  in  Mexico, 
where  this  was  written,  in  the  prime  of  strength 
and  vigor,  he  grows  so  homesick,  so  stricken  with 
longing  for  home  and  the  presence  of  those  he  loves, 
that  he  is  prevented  from  resigning  only  by  the 
thought  that  honor  will  not  allow  him  to  do  so  in 
the  face  of  approaching  conflict. 

Honor  only,  you  observe;  for  all  the  excitement, 
all  the  inspiration,  which  so  many  soldiers  feel 


84  UNION  PORTRAITS 

in  actual  battle,  was  apparently  omitted  from 
Meade's  character.  The  fighting  fury  of  Jackson 
and  Sheridan  and  Stuart,  even  the  intoxication 
which  Lee  indicated  when  he  said,  "It  is  well  that 
this  is  so  terrible,  or  else  we  might  grow  fond  of  it," 28 
seem  utterly  foreign  to  this  quiet  scholar  who 
fought  as  he  did  problems  in  arithmetic.  There  was 
little  spirit  of  adventure  in  the  man  who  wrote, 
"Before  Colonel  Cross's  death  [Cross  was  ami 
bushed  and  murdered  by  the  Mexicans],  it  was 
usual  for  the  officers  to  ride  in  all  directions,  hunt- 
ing and  for  exercise,  but  I  never  went  more  than 
two  miles,  always  with  a  party,  and  always  on 
open  ground,  where  I  had  a  fair  view  of  everything 
around  me."  29  Falkland,  whom  Meade  in  some 
points  resembles,  could  not,  in  Clarendon's  strange 
phrase,  ingeminate  "Peace!  Peace!"  with  a  more 
thirsty  longing  than  did  Meade  at  an  early  period 
in  the  war.  "Peace  —  oh,  what  a  glorious  word, 
and  how  sweet  and  delightful  would  its  realization 
be  to  me!"  30  And  one  sentence  sums  up  this  whole 
attitude  of  mind  with  conclusive  emphasis,  "I  like 
fighting  as  little  as  any  man."  31  You  will  agree, 
I  think,  that  this  is  a  singular  utterance  for  a  great 
soldier. 

IV 

Besides  these  attractive  qualities,  modesty  and 
the  love  of  peace,  which  unfitted  him  for  popular 
military  success,  Meade  had  one  positive  defect, 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       85 

and  that  was  his  inability  to  win  men.  He  had  a 
number  of  warm  friends  among  the  more  intelli- 
gent higher  officers,  he  had  the  esteem  of  many;  but 
his  subordinates  generally  did  not  love  him,  even 
when  they  trusted  him,  and  he  had  no  faculty  what- 
ever of  inspiring  an  army  with  that  personal  en- 
thusiasm which,  while  it  may  not  bring  victory 
without  great  generalship,  is  almost  essential  to 
give  great  generalship  permanent  triumph. 

This  lack  of  gift  for  dealing  with  his  military 
inferiors  did  not  come  from  insufficient  judgment 
or  insight.  On  the  contrary,  Meade's  calm,  clear, 
just  intelligence  shows  in  nothing  more  than  in  his 
fine  appreciation  of  the  characters  of  men.  This 
appears  admirably,  so  far  back  as  the  Mexican 
War,  in  his  comments  on  his  fellow  officers.  It 
appears  still  more,  during  the  Civil  War,  in  all 
he  writes  of  the  great  number  of  distinguished 
soldiers  with  whom  he  was  brought  into  con- 
tact. His  judgments  of  McClellan,  of  Burnside,  of 
Hooker,  remain  perhaps  the  most  illuminating  of 
any  that  we  have,  not  exempt  from  severity,  where 
severity  is  required,  but  absolutely  free  from  jeal- 
ousy and  inclining  to  emphasize  good  qualities, 
whenever  possible.  This  recognition  of  the  good 
is  especially  noticeable  with  Sheridan  and  Grant, 
whom  Meade  had  certainly  no  reason  to  love,  but 
whom  he  analyzes  with  the  most  kindly  and  gen- 
erous discrimination. 

It  is  possible  that  Meade  read  men  too  well  to  be 


86  UNION  PORTRAITS 

popular  with  them.  The  first  lesson  of  practical 
life  is  that  to  be  on  good  terms  with  people  we 
must  treat  them  as  if  we  thought  a  little  better  of 
them  than  we  really  do.  Though  Meade  was  thor- 
oughly democratic  in  principle,  it  is  not  certain 
that  he  cared  very  much  about  being  on  good  terms 
with  the  generality.  It  is  certain  that  he  was  not 
one  to  disguise  the  truth  for  the  sake  of  being  on 
good  terms  with  anybody. 

Whatever  the  reason,  he  had  friction  with  too 
many.  Perhaps  his  difficulties  with  Sickles  and 
Butterfield  were  natural.  These  were  men  of  an 
altogether  different  stamp.  But  he  quarreled  with 
Warren  —  and  made  it  up;  quarreled  with  Sheri- 
dan, even  with  the  generally  amiable  Burnside,  and 
did  not  make  it  up.  There  were  others  with  whom 
he  did  not  quarrel,  but  who  simply  felt  that  they 
would  much  prefer  to  serve  under  somebody  else. 
And  this  is  not  a  favorable  state  of  mind  in  war. 
Little  things  often  indicate  great  defects.  I  know 
nothing  that  better  reveals  Meade's  tactlessness 
than  General  Schaff's  excellent  account  of  the 
general's  horse.  The  animal  had  a  gait  which  was 
neither  a  walk  nor  a  trot  and  which  made  it  im- 
possible for  others  to  keep  pace  with  him  —  a  "fox- 
walk"  General  Schaff  aptly  calls  it,  and  adds  that 
members  of  the  staff  were  often  heard  to  say, 
"Damn  that  horse  of  Meade's!  I  wish  he  would 
either  go  faster  or  slower!"  32  "I  fear  that  Meade 
rode  through  life  at  something  of  a  "fox- walk," 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       87 

Also,  it  is  pretty  substantially  proved  that  under 
great  stress  his  nerves  would  break  in  unfortunate 
fits  of  temper.  We  read  of  the  great  Conde  that 
in  ordinary  converse  he  was  harsh  and  rough  with 
his  subordinates,  but  that  under  fire  his  manners 
were  restrained  into  an  exquisite  courtesy.  Just 
the  opposite  appears  to  have  been  the  case  with 
Meade.  At  the  mess  and  the  camp-fire  he  treated 
his  staff  like  a  cultured  gentleman,  but  in  battle, 
especially  if  they  brought  bad  news,  he  rated  them 
as  if  they  were  schoolboys,  swore,  if  need  be,  and 
in  general  so  comported  himself  that  men  preferred 
not  to  approach  him,  if  it  could  be  avoided.  "A 
battle  always  put  him  in  a  fury,"  says  Grant.  "  He 
raged  from  the  beginning  to  the  end.  His  own  staff 
officers  would  dread  to  bring  him  a  report  of  any- 
thing wrong.  Meade's  anger  would  overflow  on 
the  heads  of  his  nearest  and  best  friends."  33 

Meade's  biographers  reject  evidence  of  this  sort 
coming  from  Grant  and  his  followers  —  for  in- 
stance, Dana  and  Horace  Porter  —  as  somewhat 
suspicious,  and  no  doubt  with  these  reporters  there 
was  some  exaggeration.  But  there  are  plenty  of 
other  witnesses.  General  Schaff  has  no  prejudice 
against  Meade;  yet  he,  too,  writes:  "I  have  seen 
him  so  cross  and  ugly  that  no  one  dared  to  speak 
to  him  —  in  fact,  at  such  times  his  staff  and  every- 
body else  kept  as  clear  of  him  as  possible."  34 

The  most  striking  written  indication  we  have  of 
this  weakness  of  Meade's  is  his  tactless  message  to 


88  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Burnside  at  the  time  of  the  mine  disaster:  "Do 
you  mean  to  say  your  officers  and  men  will  not 
obey  your  orders  to  advance?  If  not,  what  is  the 
obstacle?  I  wish  to  know  the  truth  and  desire  an 
immediate  answer/'  35  To  which  Burnside,  with 
natural  if  somewhat  exaggerated  sensibility,  re- 
plied: "I  have  never  in  any  report  said  anything 
different  from  what  I  conceived  to  be  the  truth. 
Were  it  not  insubordinate  I  would  say  that  the 
latter  remark  of  your  note  was  unofficerlike  and 
ungentlemanly."  36  And  thus  the  reply  churlish 
breeds  ever  the  countercheck  quarrelsome. 

When  I  read  all  these  things,  I  turn  to  Meade's 
portrait,  and  begin  to  understand  it.  The  high 
intelligence  is  under  the  high  forehead.  The  stern 
brows  and  eagle  nose  mark  the  unquailing  courage. 
There  are  lines  of  sensitiveness,  lines  of  possible 
sympathy.  But  it  is  not  the  face  of  a  man  men 
love. 

A  medical  officer  came  to  Meade  at  some  not 
very  fortunate  moment  and  complained  that  the 
soldiers  were  calling  him  "Old  Pills"  and  he 
wanted  it  stopped.  Meade  clapped  on  his  great 
eyeglasses,  glared  furiously  at  the  complainant, 
and  snarled,  "Well,  what  of  that?  How  can  I  pre- 
vent it?  Why,  I  hear  that,  when  I  rode  'put  the 

other  day,  some  of  the  men  called  me  a  'd d 

old  goggle-eyed  snapping  turtle/"  37 

A  d d  old  goggle-eyed  snapping  turtle!  A 

man  had  ever  so  much  rather  be  called  the  savior 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       89 

of  his  country,  had  n't  he?  But  these  soldiers  are 
so  keen-sighted  and  so  abominably  outspoken ! 

The  ill-temper,  the  irritability,  however,  were 
only  superficial,  only  the  outcome  of  overwrought 
nerves  stretched  to  the  point  of  cracking.  Every 
one  recognizes  that  after  such  a  crisis  the  general 
was  most  eager  and  cordial  in  his  expression  of 
regret.  Moreover,  General  Schaff  adds  that  "as 
the  campaign  progressed,  with  its  frightful  carnage 
and  disappointment,  his  temper  grew  fiercer";38 
and  this  not  only  explains  any  apparent  inconsist- 
ency in  the  anecdote  of  coolness  at  Gettysburg 
above  narrated  but  much  besides.  It  reminds  us 
that  Meade  was  working  under  difficulties  that 
would  have  strained  a  far  more  phlegmatic  disposi- 
tion. After  he  had  held  for  months  the  sole  com- 
mand of  that  magnificent  army,  he  was  suddenly 
subjected  to  the  absolute  control  of  Grant,  a  con- 
trol kindly  exercised,  but  most  galling,  to  say  the 
least.  If  the  head  of  the  Army  of  the  Potomac 
wished  to  leave  his  post  for  a  day,  he  was  obliged 
humbly  to  beg  permission  of  his  superior.  Such 
outbursts  of  wrath  as  he  poured  upon  Sheridan  are 
perhaps  inexcusable.  They  are  perfectly  explica- 
ble when  we  consider  that  Sheridan  was  so  sup- 
ported by  the  highest  authorities,  that  he  had  the 
impudence  to  speak  to  his  nominal  commander  in 
the  following  fashion:  "I  told  him  that  since  he 
insisted  on  giving  the  cavalry  directions  without 
consulting  or  even  notifying  me,  he  could  hence- 


90  UNION  PORTRAITS 

forth  command  the  cavalry  corps  himself  —  that  I 
would  not  give  it  another  order."  39  For  such  a 
reply,  in  any  European  army,  the  impetuous  Irish- 
man would  probably  have  been  shot. 

Through  all  these  immense  difficulties,  in  spite 
of  superficial  irritation,  Meade  bore  himself  with  a 
fundamental  patience  and  dignity  which  we  cannot 
fail  to  admire.  Again  and  again  he  declares  his 
humble,  earnest  wish  to  do  his  duty  and  his  utter 
disregard  of  personal  advantage.  No  finer  letter 
was  written  during  the  war  than  that  in  which  he 
expresses  to  Halleck  his  willingness  to  be  treated 
as  a  mere  instrument  for  the  welfare  of  the  cause 
all  were  desirous  to  serve.  "  I  take  this  occasion  to 
say  to  you  and  through  you  to  the  President,  that 
I  have  no  pretensions  to  any  superior  capacity  for 
the  post  he  has  assigned  me  to;  that  all  I  can  do  is 
to  exert  my  utmost  efforts  and  do  the  best  I  can; 
but  that  the  moment  those  who  have  a  right  to 
judge  my  actions  think  or  feel  satisfied,  either  that 
I  am  wanting  or  that  another  would  do  better,  that 
moment  I  earnestly  desire  to  be  relieved,  not  on 
my  own  account,  but  on  account  of  the  country 
and  the  cause."  * 

v 

So  we  return  to  what  is  attractive  about  Meade, 
to  what  is  charming;  for  however  unapproachable 
he  may  have  been  in  official  relations,  no  one 
can  read  his  letters  without  being  drawn  to  him, 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       91 

without  feeling  a  singular  attachment  for  one  so 
simple,  so  large-hearted,  so  sincere.  It  is  very 
curious  that  you  might  study  the  biography  care- 
fully without  getting  the  least  intimation  of  faults 
of  temper,  and  this  seems  to  indicate  that  those 
faults  were  somewhat  less  radical  than  many 
would  have  us  believe.  The  only  hint  of  anything 
of  the  kind  is  the  sharp  scene  with  a  newspaper 
man,  when  temper  was  surely  justified,  if  ever. 
"I  asked  his  authority;  he  said  it  was  the  talk  of 
the  camp.  I  told  him  it  was  a  base  and  wicked  lie, 
and  that  I  would  make  an  example  of  him  which 
should  not  only  serve  to  deter  others  from  com- 
mitting like  offenses,  but  would  give  publicity  to 
his  lie  and  the  truth."  4l  And  the  general  ordered 
the  offender  paraded  through  the  army,  with,  a 
placard  stating  that  he  was  a  "Libeler  of  the 
Press/'  It  is  believed  by  some  that  this  incident 
occasioned  a  prejudice  and  even  a  conspiracy 
among  the  newspaper  men  which  afterwards 
worked  greatly  to  the  disadvantage  of  Meade. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  is  plenty  of  evidence 
that  in  general  social  intercourse  Meade  could  be 
very  attractive.  His  broad  and  trained  intelligence 
made  his  conversation  full  of  interest.  His  man- 
ners were  easy  and  courteous.  And  General  Schaff 
emphasizes  the  peculiarly  sensitive,  refined,  and 
sympathetic  quality  of  his  voice. 

But  it  is  in  his  family  relations  that  the  general's 
charm  is  felt  most.  His  letters  to  his  wife  have 


92  UNION  PORTRAITS 

not  one  atom  of  sentimentality;  but  they  have 
unusual  tenderness  and  winning  warmth  of  affec- 
tion. Every  detail  of  his  children's  growth  and 
education  interests  him  and  his  longing  to  be  with 
them  is  sometimes  so  great  that  he  is  almost  ready 
to  forget  duty  and  even  honor.  "At  night,  when  I 
thought  of  seeing  you  and  my  dear  children  ...  I 
would  be  almost  crazy,  and  determined  the  next 
morning  I  would  go  and  get  my  leave."  42  His 
respect  and  esteem  for  his  wife  show  in  the  habit 
of  referring  every  question,  even  those  connected 
with  his  profession,  to  her  sympathy  and  judg- 
ment, and  his  deep  devotion  expresses  itself  often 
in  passages  like  the  following:  "Do  you  know,  to- 
day is  our  wedding-day  and  my  birthday.  Twenty- 
one  years  ago  we  pledged  our  faith  to  each  other, 
and  I  doubt  if  any  other  couple  live  who,  with  all 
the  ups  and  downs  of  life,  have  had  more  happiness 
with  each  other  than  you  and  I."  43 

The  intimate  self-revelation  of  these  domestic 
letters  shows  in  the  writer  of  them  a  singular 
simplicity  and  single-heartedness,  which  are  quite 
irresistible.  Like  many  men  of  great  intellectual 
power,  Meade  seemed  to  analyze  himself  with  as 
perfect  frankness  as  he  would  have  done  any  one 
else.  I  have  already  indicated  this  in  regard  to 
military  matters,  but  it  is  even  more  attractive  as 
to  personal  experience.  When  he  is  about  to  be  set 
aside,  he  notes  the  fact  with  perfect  candor  of 
acceptance.  "My  time  I  suppose  has  passed,  and 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       93 

I  must  now  content  myself  with  doing  my  duty 
unnoticed. "  44  When  a  great  crisis  is  at  hand,  he 
writes  down  quietly  his  own  fears  and  tremors: 
"Sometimes  I  have  a  little  sinking  at  the  heart, 
when  I  reflect  that  perhaps  I  may  fail  at  the  grand 
scratch;  but  I  try  to  console  myself  with  the  be- 
lief that  I  shall  probably  do  as  well  as  most  of 
my  neighbors,  and  that  your  firm  faith  must 
be  founded  on  some  reasonable  groundwork."  45 
But  the  most  charming  illustration  of  this  personal 
candor  is  the  general's  comment  when  his  friend 
Reynolds  is  to  be  put  over  him.  Few  men  would 
let  such  a  remark  go  beyond  their  own  conscience, 
and  many  would  not  be  honest  enough  to  admit  it 
even  there.  "As  yet  the  order  has  not  been  issued, 
but  when  it  comes  I  shall  subside  gracefully  into 
a  division  commander,  though  frankness  compels 
me  to  say,  I  do  wish  Reynolds  had  stayed  away, 
and  that  I  could  have  had  a  chance  to  command 
a  corps  in  action.  Perhaps  it  may  yet  occur/' 46 
And  again,  in  a  little  different  connection:  "I 
envied  Reynolds  when  he  left  for  Harrisburg,  and 
secretly  thought  the  Governor  might  have  ap- 
plied for  me/' 47  Now  that  I  call  a  ravishing  bit  of 
human  nature. 

The  truth  is,  Meade  could  afford  to  be  frank, 
because  he  had  nothing  to  conceal.  Few  men  have 
built  their  lives  upon  a  broader  foundation  of  dig- 
nity, of  purity,  of  courage,  of  faithful  devotion  to 
duty.  His  religious  interests  are  certainly  neither 


94  UNION  PORTRAITS 

obtrusive  nor  excessive.  But  they  were  evidently 
very  deep,  very  genuine,  and  very  vital  in  their 
influence.  At  times  they  become  almost  naive,  as 
where  he  inclines  to  think  that  his  leg  was  saved 
by  special  interposition  of  the  providence  of  God. 
But  usually  there  is  a  grave  and  solemn  earnest- 
ness about  them  which  admirably  fits  the  solid, 
loyal  temper  of  the  man.  "  I  thought,  too,  of  how 
I  was  preserved  then  and  since  in  many  perilous 
times  through  God's  mercy  and  will,  and  prayed 
He  would  continue  His  gracious  protection  to  me, 
and  in  His  own  good  time  restore  me  to  you,  or  if 
this  was  not  His  will,  and  it  was  decreed  that  I  was 
to  be  summoned,  that  He  would  forgive  me,  for 
His  Son's  sake,  the  infinite  number  of  sins  I  have 
all  my  life  been  committing."  48 

One  bitter  sentence,  wrung  from  Meade  in  the 
hour  of  neglect,  deserves  particular  attention: 
"Don't  worry  yourself  about  this,  treat  it  with 
contempt.  It  cannot  be  remedied,  and  we  should 
be  resigned.  I  don't  believe  the  truth  will  ever 
be  known,  and  I  have  a  great  contempt  for  His- 
tory." 49  This  is  contrary  to  what  is  usually  as- 
serted. Most  neglected  heroes  console  themselves 
with  the  thought  that  history  will  set  everything 
right.  Will  it? 

Without  going  too  much  into  the  general  ques- 
tion, I  think  it  may  be  maintained  that  there  is 
always  some  cause  for  a  great  reputation.  When 
a  man  is  lauded  by  his  contemporaries  and  by 


GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE       95 

posterity,  there  is  some  reason  for  it.  What  is 
puzzling,  and  what  seems  to  justify  Meade,  is  that 
the  cause  is  so  often  inadequate  to  the  result.  A 
man  may  have  splendid  gifts,  gifts  of  the  highest 
value  to  the  world,  and  be  known  only  to  few, 
while  one  who  has  a  fine  figure  and  a  tongue  and 
can  drink  a  cocktail  cordially  may  get  laurels  and 
a  statue.  It  was  something  so  with  Meade.  He 
had  a  dozen  great  qualities.  But  because  he  had 
not  the  gift  of  drawing  men  after  him,  he  is  out- 
shone in  popular  remembrance,  not  only  by  such 
leaders  as  Sherman  and  Thomas  and  Lee,  but  even 
by  lesser  figures,  like  McClellan  and  Sheridan. 

He  was  just  simply  the  man  who  fought  Gettys- 
burg. After  all,  perhaps  that  is  something. 


IV 

GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Southampton  County,  Virginia,  July  31, 1816. 

Studied  law  at  nineteen. 

Graduated  at  West  Point,  1840. 

Served  in  Florida,  1841. 

Mexican  War,  1846, 1847. 

Instructor  at  West  Point,  1851. 

Married  Frances  L.  Kellogg,  November  17,  1852. 

Served  in  West,  1854  to  1860. 

Colonel,  May  3, 1861. 

Brigadier-general  of  volunteers,  August  31,  1861. 

Commanded  at  Mill  Spring,  January,  1862. 

Major-general  of  volunteers,  April  25,  1862. 

Distinguished  at  Chickamauga,  September,  1863. 

With  Sherman  in  Atlanta  campaign. 

Wins  battle  of  Nashville,  December,  1864. 

Major-general  regular  army,  December  24,  1864. 

Commanded  military  division  of  the  Tennessee,  June,  1865. 

Commanded  military  division  of  the  Pacific,  June,  1869. 

Died,  March  28, 1870. 


IV 

GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS 

I 

THOMAS  ranks  among  the  highest  as  a  general 
and  is  most  winning  as  a  man.  But  the  fact  that, 
although  a  Virginian,  he  remained  true  to  the 
Union  and  fought  against  his  State  and  family  and 
friends  gives  perhaps  the  chief  interest  to  the  study 
of  his  character  and  mode  of  thought. 

It  will  be  advantageous  to  begin  by  presenting 
in  the  abstract  all  the  arguments  that  appear  to 
justify  a  military  man  in  such  a  position. 

First,  there  is  the  oath  of  allegiance.  In  all 
countries  and  under  all  governments  it  has  always 
been  held  that  the  officer  is  bound  to  follow  his 
flag,  that  he  has  accepted  training  and  support 
under  the  constituted  authorities,  and  that  he  is 
pledged  to  render  obedience  and  to  offer  all  his 
efforts  and  his  life  to  carrying  out  the  orders  that 
come  to  him  from  his  lawful  superior.  A  man's 
conscience  is,  of  course,  higher  than  his  military 
duty,  but  the  instances  where  the  two  should  be 
separated  are  very  rare  indeed. 

In  the  case  of  our  Civil  War  there  was  a  great 
deal  more  to  the  question  than  mere  mechanical 
loyalty.  For  nearly  a  hundred  years  the  Union 


100  UNION  PORTRAITS 

had  grown  and  flourished,  in  spite  of  sharp  political 
disputes.  The  possibilities  of  future  expansion  and 
prosperity  were  enormous.  It  needed  but  little 
prophetic  vision  to  look  forward  to  wealth  and 
happiness  for  coming  generations  such  as  the 
world  had  hardly  ever  seen  before.  But  a  man  who 
knew  what  war  was  and  what  armies  were  and 
what  military  government  was  did  not  need  to  be 
told  that  such  a  future  would  be  out  of  the  ques- 
tion, if  the  Union  were  shattered  into  fragments. 
To  a  man  with  that  knowledge  the  attempt  to 
break  up  the  Union  was  fatal,  intolerable  folly. 
This  was  what  Robert  E.  Lee  meant  when  he  said: 
"I  can  anticipate  no  greater  calamity  for  the  coun- 
try than  a  dissolution  of  the  Union."  *  And  again: 
"Secession  is  nothing  but  revolution."  2  And  yet 
again:  "It  is  idle  to  talk  of  secession.  Anarchy 
would  have  been  established,  and  not  a  govern- 
ment, by  Washington,  Hamilton,  Jefferson,  Madi- 
son, and  the  other  patriots  of  the  Revolution."  3 
It  was  not  only  the  future  of  the  United  States 
that  was  involved,  but  the  future  of  democracy. 
Those  who  urged  secession  claimed  to  be  defend- 
ing popular  government  against  a  usurping  execu- 
tive. In  reality  nothing  could  show  more  clearly 
the  danger  of  centralization  in  a  republic  than  the 
history  of  the  Confederacy.  And  the  government 
which  was  founded  on  state  rights  ended  in  a 
tragic  —  or  comic  —  exhibition  of  building  a 
strong  central  authority  on  state  wrongs.  Every 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  101 

one  who  longed  passionately  for  the  success  of  free 
institutions  must  have  appreciated  that  there 
could  be  no  greater  danger  to  such  institutions 
than  the  establishment  of  two,  or  a  dozen,  con- 
federacies watching  perpetually  in  armed  eager- 
ness to  cut  each  other's  throats.  A  striking  illus- 
tration of  how  forcibly  this  was  felt  by  outsiders 
appears  in  a  speech  made  by  Disraeli  in  1863,  less 
often  quoted  than  some  English  utterances  of  that 
time:  "After  the  conclusion  of  the  war  we  will 
see  a  different  America  from  that  which  was  known 
to  our  fathers  and  from  that  even  of  which  this 
generation  has  had  so  much  experience.  It  will,  I 
believe,  be  an  America  of  diplomacy,  it  will  be  an 
America  of  rival  States  and  of  manoeuvring  cabi- 
nets, of  frequent  turbulence  and  frequent  wars."  4 
You  perceive  from  what  the  good  Lord,  working 
through  Thomas  and  others  like  him,  delivered  us. 

And  if  this  was  the  patriotic  view  of  a  broad- 
minded  American,  it  might  have  been  equally  the 
view  of  a  loyal  Virginian.  What  was  fatal  to  the 
whole  could  not  well  be  advantageous  to  the  parts. 
If  the  preservation  of  the  Union  meant  peace, 
freedom,  and  popular  government  for  Maine,  Illi- 
nois, and  California,  it  meant  the  same  thing  for 
Virginia,  and  the  destruction  of  the  Union  meant 
an  abyss  of  possible  disaster  for  Virginia  also. 

Writing  formerly  of  General  Lee,  I  had  occasion 
to  say  that  in  the  apparently  most  remote  con- 
tingency of  a  secession  of  Massachusetts  or  of  New 


102  UNION  PORTRAITS 

England,  I  should  follow  my  State  even  if  the 
cause  of  secession  did  not  meet  with  my  approval. 
I  now  repeat  the  statement  without  hesitating  in 
the  slightest.  The  love  of  home,  the  might  of 
ancestral  tradition,  New  England  habits  of  thought 
and  habits  of  affection  are  too  deeply  rooted  in 
every  fibre  of  my  heart  for  me  to  take  any  risk  of 
being  exiled  from  them  perpetually.  But  it  may 
easily  be  maintained  that  one  who  followed  a  dif- 
ferent course  would  show  a  broader,  a  more  far- 
seeing,  a  more  self-sacrificing  patriotism,  even  as  a 
New  Englander. 

Reasoning  from  analogy  is  always  defective  and 
often  misleading,  but  when  Southerners  say,  with 
Captain  McCabe,  that  Thomas  turned  his  back 
on  Virginia  in  the  hour  of  her  sorest  need,  I  am 
tempted  to  put  the  matter  thus:  If  a  man  sees  his 
mother  about  to  commit  suicide  in  a  fit  of  tem- 
porary insanity,  which  is  more  truly  filial,  that  he 
should  stand  reverently  and  watch  her  do  it,  or 
that  he  should  do  his  best  to  restrain  her,  even  with 
a  certain  amount  of  brutal  violence? 

So  much  for  the  line  of  argument  that  Thomas 
might  have  used.  How  far  did  he  actually  use  it? 
Nobody  knows.  His  numerous  admirers  are  ready 
and  eager  to  tell  us  what  they  thought,  what  they 
think  he  ought  to  have  thought  and  must  have 
thought.  But  the  reliable  evidence  as  to  his  own 
mental  processes  is  meagre  in  the  extreme. 

One  thing  we  can  say  at  starting,  as  positively 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  103 

as  we  can  speak  of  any  human  motive.  It  is  al- 
leged that  Thomas  was  governed  by  considerations 
of  personal  advancement  and  promotion.  The 
same  thing  has  been  alleged  in  regard  to  Lee,  and 
with  just  as  much  truth  in  one  case  as  in  the 
other.  The  characters  of  both  men  absolutely 
preclude  the  assignment,  even  the  consideration, 
of  anything  so  contemptible. 

Further,  Thomas  is  said  to  have  been  influenced 
by  his  wife,  who  was  a  New  York  woman.  Proba- 
bly he  was,  though  Mrs.  Thomas  makes  the  almost 
incomprehensible  assertion  that  "never  a  word 
passed  between  General  Thomas  and  myself,  or 
any  one  of  the  family,  upon  the  subject  of  his 
remaining  loyal  to  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment."5 I  say  "almost  incomprehensible"  be- 
cause the  general  spent  the  greatest  part  of  the 
fierce  winter  of  1860-61,  when  everybody  was 
talking  politics,  with  his  wife  in  New  York.  And  I 
repeat,  probably  he  was  influenced.  Who  is  not, 
by  his  surroundings  and  by  those  he  loves?  Does 
any  one  believe  that  Lee  was  not  influenced  by 
Mrs.  Lee  and  by  his  friends  and  family?  But  that 
either  of  these  men  could  be  persuaded  to  do  any- 
thing he  thought  wrong,  by  his  wife  or  by  any 
one  else,  is  a  mere  figment  of  prejudice  and  party 
passion. 

What  actual  evidence  we  have,  however,  as  to 
Thomas's  attitude  in  that  trying  time  goes  practi- 
cally all  one  way  and,  I  think,  shows  beyond  ques- 


104  UNION  PORTRAITS 

tion  that  he  had  his  hour  of  doubt  and  difficulty. 
The  story,  widely  current  at  the  South,  that 
Thomas  wrote  to  the  Confederate  authorities  to 
know  how  high  rank  would  be  given  him  if  he 
joined  them,  may  be  rejected  at  once,  on  Thomas's 
own  vehement  statement,6  and  was  merely  a  mis- 
interpretation of  documents  to  be  considered 
shortly.  The  explicit  testimony  of  Fitzhugh  Lee, 
that  Thomas  told  him  in  New  York,  early  in  1861, 7 
that  he  intended  to  resign,  cannot,  of  course,  be 
for  one  moment  disputed  as  to  intentional  veracity. 
It  is  possible,  however,  that  Lee,  in  his  own  enthu- 
siasm, may  have  taken  Thomas  more  positively 
than  was  meant.  Evidence  less  likely  to  be  ques- 
tioned by  Northerners  is  furnished  by  Keyes,  who 
knew  Thomas  well  before  the  war  and  regarded 
him  with  the  greatest  esteem  and  affection.  Keyes 
attributes  the  general's  final  decision  to  his  wife 
and  adds,  "Had  he  followed  his  own  inclinations, 
he  would  have  joined  the  Confederates,  and 
fought  against  the  North  with  the  same  ability 
and  valor  that  he  displayed  in  our  cause." 8 

Further,  there  are  two  letters  of  Thomas  which 
have  a  very  interesting  connection  with  the  point 
we  are  discussing.  On  January  18,  1861,  he  wrote 
to  the  superintendent  of  the  Virginia  Military 
Institute,  the  school  in  which  Jackson  was  an 
instructor  and  which  bore  something  the  same 
relation  to  the  State  that  West  Point  bears  to 
the  nation,  as  follows:  "In  looking  over  the  files 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  105 

of  the  'National  Intelligencer'  this  morning,  I 
met  with  your  advertisement  for  a  commandant 
of  cadets  and  instructor  of  tactics  at  the  Institute. 
If  not  already  filled,  I  will  be  under  obligations  if 
you  will  inform  me  what  salary  and  allowances 
pertain  to  the  situation,  as  from  present  appear- 
ances I  feel  it  will  soon  be  necessary  for  me  to  be 
looking  up  some  means  of  support."  9 

It  is  urged  by  Thomas's  biographers  that  this 
letter  has  no  political  significance  whatever,  that 
the  general  was  at  that  time  doubtful  about  the 
effects  of  a  severe  injury  recently  received  which 
he  thought  might  disable  him  for  further  active 
service. 

This  explanation  may  be  correct,  but  it  must  be 
admitted  that  the  coincidence  is  singular  and  un- 
fortunate. It  becomes  much  more  so,  when  we 
weigh  the  language  of  another  letter,  written  on 
March  12,  1861.  Governor  Letcher,  of  Virginia, 
had  caused  the  position  of  chief  of  ordnance  of  the 
State  to  be  offered  to  Thomas,  if  he  would  resign 
from  the  United  States  service.  Thomas  replies: 
"I  have  the  honor  to  state,  after  expressing  my 
most  sincere  thanks  for  your  very  kind  offer,  that 
it  is  not  my  wish  to  leave  the  service  of  the  United 
States  as  long  as  it  is  honorable  for  me  to  remain 
in  it,  and  therefore  as  long  as  my  native  State, 
Virginia,  remains  in  the  Union,  it  is  my  purpose 
to  remain  in  the  Army  unless  required  to  perform 
duties  alike  repulsive  to  honor  and  humanity."  I0 


106  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Here  we  have  almost  the  identical  words  of  Lee  as 
to  the  Union,  written  at  about  the  same  time:  "I 
am  willing  to  sacrifice  everything  but  honor  for 
its  preservation."  " 

Also,  we  have  a  private  letter,  less  authoritative 
than  these  official  documents,  but  even  more  con- 
vincing, if  accepted.  In  Dr.  Wyeth's  "With  Sabre 
and  Scalpel,"  there  is  printed  a  letter  from  Miss 
Fannie  C.  Thomas,  sister  of  the  general,  dated 
November  2,  1900,  which  runs  as  follows:  "With 
regard  to  the  visit  of  General  Thomas,  I  have  to 
say  he  arrived  at  the  home  [the  Thomas  homestead 
in  Southampton,  Virginia],  the  fifteenth  of  De- 
cember, 1860,  and  remained  until  the  eighth  of 
January,  1861,  I  believe.  While  here  he  said  he 
should  side  with  the  South  and  my  sister  says  tell 
you  the  last  word  he  said  to  her  at  parting  was  he 
should  be  back  in  March.  He  had  much  of  his 
army  baggage  sent  here  and  left  it,  wishing  it  to 
be  stored  in  the  house,  implying  he  would  return 
for  it,  and  it  would  be  ready  for  his  use;  he  also 
brought  his  servants  and  left  them  in  my  sister's 
care  until  such  time  as  he  and  his  wife  might  re- 
quire the  services  of  the  cook,  whom  Mrs.  Thomas 
wished  to  retain.  The  above  are  facts."  12 

In  view  of  all  this  evidence,  I  do  not  see  how  any 
unprejudiced  person  can  doubt  that  up  to  the  mid- 
dle of  March,  at  any  rate,  Thomas  was  divided  be- 
tween his  loyalty  to  the  Union  and  his  loyalty  to 
Virginia.  The  only  shred  of  actual  testimony  against 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  107 

this  is  Colonel  Hough's  report  of  a  conversation  in 
which  his  chief  declared  that  "his  duty  was  clear 
from  the  beginning."  13  But  this  conversation  oc- 
curred long  after  the  struggle  was  over,  when  time 
and  bitter  memories  had  accentuated  everything, 
and  in  using  the  phrase,  "from  the  beginning,"  the 
general  may  possibly  have  Jiad  in  mind  only  the 
actual  beginning  of  the  war.  To  me  the  comment 
of  Grant,  who  must  have  spoken  from  reliable 
hearsay,  if  not  from  personal  knowledge,  seems 
a  perfectly  satisfactory  statement  of  the  case: 
"When  the  war  was  coming,  Thomas  felt  like  a 
Virginian,  and  talked  like  one,  and  had  all  the 
sentiment  then  so  prevalent  about  the  rights  of 
slavery  and  sovereign  States  and  so  on.  But  the 
more  Thomas  thought  it  over,  the  more  he  saw  the 
crime  of  treason  behind  it  all."  14 

And  why  should  any  one  blame  him  for  hesita- 
tion in  the  matter?  If  he  was  a  man,  with  a  man's 
heart,  and  not  a  mere  military  machine,  was  he 
not  bound  to  hesitate?  The  point  would  not  be 
worth  the  space  I  have  given  it,  if  it  were  not  for 
the  folly  of  Northern  apologists  on  the  one  hand, 
who  insist  that  their  hero  must  always  have 
thought  as  they  did,  and  for  the  cruelty  of  South- 
ern partisans  on  the  other,  who  insinuate  ignoble 
motives  where  there  is  no  possible  foundation  for 
them.  Whatever  may  have  been  Thomas's  doubts 
when  the  dispute  was  in  a  theoretical  stage,  the 
guns  at  Sumter  settled  the  question  for  him. 


108  UNION  PORTRAITS 

When  he  heard  that  echo,  he  wrote  to  his  wife 
words,  which,  though  only  indirectly  quoted  for 
us,  are  equally  significant  of  his  decision  and  of  his 
previous  indecision:  "Whichever  way  he  turned 
the  matter  over  in  his  mind,  his  oath  of  allegiance 
to  his  Government  always  came  uppermost."  15 

A  few  days  later  than  this,  in  the  very  interesting 
letter  of  Fitz  John  Porter,  printed  in  the  "Official 
Record/' 16  we  see  Thomas  assisting  to  hold  others 
to  their  duty,  and  from  that  time  on  there  is  no 
indication  of  the  faintest  wavering  or  regret,  any 
more  than  there  is  with  Lee,  who  had  chosen  the 
other  side  after  a  bitter  struggle  of  his  own.  In- 
deed, with  the  progress  of  the  war,  Thomas's  lan- 
guage in  regard  to  rebels  and  rebellion  becomes 
more  and  more  energetic,  as  appears  in  one  very 
curious  passage  as  to  desertion,  written  in  April, 
1864:  "  I  believe  many  of  them  return  to  the  enemy 
after  recruiting  their  health  and  strength,  because 
they  are  rebels  by  nature;  others  because  of  family 
influence,  and  others  like  the  drunkard  to  his  bot- 
tle, because  they  have  not  sufficient  moral  firmness 
to  resist  the  natural  depravity  of  their  hearts."  17 
In  the  last  clause  I  think  we  trace  what  Thomas 
would  have  felt  to  be  the  just  analysis  of  his  own 
psychological  experience. 

As  shown  by  Grant's  remark  above  quoted, 
Thomas's  attitude  before  the  war  in  regard  to  the 
great  question  of  slavery  was  probably  that  of  the 
average  moderate  Southerner.  He  was  never  an 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  109 

extensive  slaveholder.  But  while  in  Texas  he  pur- 
chased a  slave  woman  for  actual  needs  of  service, 
and  rather  than  sell  her  again  into  the  hands  of 
strangers,  he  sent  her  home  to  Virginia,  at  very 
considerable  expense  and  inconvenience. 

II    ^ 

The  difficulty  we  have  met  with  in  getting  at 
Thomas's  state  of  mind  during  the  critical  months 
of  1861  forms  an  excellent  introduction  to  the 
study  of  his  character.  There  is  the  same  difficulty 
in  getting  at  his  state  of  mind  at  any  other  time. 
He  was  very  insistent  that  none  of  his  private  let- 
ters should  be  published  after  his  death,  and  very 
few  have  been.  His  official  correspondence  is 
extensive;  but  it  is  singularly  formal  in  character 
and  tells  us  almost  nothing  about  the  man's  soul, 
except  that  such  reserve  is  in  itself  significant  and 
that  even  trifling  hints  of  self-revelation  become 
valuable  in  such  a  scarcity.  Thus,  a  letter  that 
begins,  "Dear  Sherman,"  is  almost  startling  in  its 
contrast  with  the  usual  staid  formulae  of  subor- 
dinate respect. 

Not  only  in  letters,  but  in  everything  was 
Thomas  reserved,  self-contained,  self-controlled. 
"A  boy  of  few  words  and  of  an  excellent  spirit,"  18 
was  about  all  the  information  that  his  biographer 
could  gather  as  to  his  childhood.  At  West  Point, 
where  he  was  graduated  in  1840,  in  the  Indian 
campaigns,  during  the  Mexican  War,  in  which  he 


110  UNION  PORTRAITS 

distinguished  himself  greatly,  and  through  the  in- 
terval till  the  Civil  War  came,  there  is  a  similar  rec- 
ord: quiet,  faithful  service,  and  no  more  said  than 
was  necessary,  a  strong,  calm,  patient,  dignified 
soldier,  ready  alike  for  good  and  evil  fortune.  Nor 
did  he  appear  differently  throughout  the  great 
conflict,  from  his  first  victory  at  Mill  Springs,  in 
January,  1862,  through  Shiloh  and  Perryville  and 
Murfreesboro  and  Chickamauga  and  Chattanooga 
and  Atlanta,  to  the  last  victory  at  Nashville,  one 
of  the  most  skillful  and  decisive  battles  of  history. 
Everywhere  it  was  a  question  of  deeds,  not  of 
words,  of  accomplishing  the  task  set  and  making  as 
little  fuss  about  it  as  possible.  Everywhere  there 
was  shrinking  from  cheap  publicity  and  the  adver- 
tising through  self  or  others  which  did  more  for 
some  war  reputations  than  great  fighting.  When 
asked  to  become  a  candidate  for  the  presidency 
after  the  war,  Thomas  declined,  giving  as  one  rea- 
son: "I  can  never  consent,  voluntarily,  to  place 
myself  in  a  position  where  scurrilous  newspaper 
men  and  political  demagogues  can  make  free  with 
my  personal  character  and  reputation,  with  im- 
punity." 19 

The  advantages  of  this  splendid  poise  and  self- 
contained  power  in  Thomas's  character  deserve 
analysis  in  many  ways.  Let  us  consider  the  nega- 
tive advantages  first.  For  one  thing,  Thomas  was 
free  from  overconfidence.  He  did  not  press  eagerly 
into  undertakings  beyond  his  strength  and  conse- 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  111 

quently  he  and  his  army  were  saved  the  humilia- 
tion and  demoralization  that  come  from  drawing 
back.  Moreover,  Thomas  avoided  the  brag  and 
bluster  which  disfigure  the  glory  of  so  many  really 
able  soldiers.  He  may  have  felt  in  his  heart  that 
he  could  do  great  things,  but  he  did  not  proclaim 
it.  Indeed,  on  this  point  he  erred  in  the  direction 
of  excessive  modesty.  "So  modest  was  he  that  his 
face  would  color  with  blushes  when  his  troops 
cheered  him,"  says  one  who  knew  him  well.20  To 
be  sure,  his  enthusiastic  biographer  observes,  with 
fine  discrimination,  that  when  a  modest  man  does 
break  out,  he  does  so  thoroughly.  A  curious  in- 
stance of  this  is  a  speech  Thomas  was  forced  to 
make  after  the  war,  in  which,  announcing  that  he 
was  a  modest  man,  he  went  on  to  explain  his  merits 
in  refusing  to  take  command  when  offered  him  to 
the  detriment  of  his  superior.21  A  less  modest  man, 
with  his  wits  more  about  him,  would  perhaps  have 
left  the  remark  to  some  one  else.  But  a  much 
more  important  illustration  of  the  truth  and  nobil- 
ity of  nature  underlying  the  modesty  appears  in 
another  speech  in  which  the  general  explained  the 
battle  of  Nashville  and  his  chief  concern  seemed 
to  be  to  point  out  his  great  mistake  in  not  making 
use  of  the  cavalry  to  destroy  Hood  completely. 
You  will  go  some  way  before  you  find  another 
commander  busy  enlarging  on  the  things  he  ought 
to  have  done  and  did  not  do.22 
Again,  Thomas's  reserve  saved  him  from  the 


UNION  PORTRAITS 

fault,  too  general  on  both  sides  during  the  war,  of 
speaking  harshly  in  criticism  of  his  superiors  or  his 
subordinates,  of  allowing  that  jealousy  of  others' 
success,  which  is  perhaps  inseparable  from  human 
weakness,  to  become  manifest  in  outward  speech 
and  action.  It  is  rare  indeed  that  he  expresses  him- 
self with  such  frankness  as  about  Schurz:  "I  do 
not  think  he  is  worth  much  from  what  I  have  seen 
of  him  and  should  not  regret  to  have  him  go," 23 
or  in  regard  to  an  expedition  of  Stoneman:  "The 
Stoneman  raid  turns  out  to  be  a  humbug.  ...  It 
seems  that  when  twenty-five  of  the  enemy  are  seen 
anywhere,  they  are  considered  in  force/' 24  On  the 
other  hand,  how  admirable  was  the  loyalty,  based, 
of  course,  on  sound  judgment,  which  made  him 
unwilling  to  be  put  in  place  of  Buell  on  the  eve 
of  battle  and  in  the  highest  degree  reluctant  to 
succeed  Rosecrans.  When  the  latter  change  was 
first  proposed,  Dana  wrote  that  Thomas  refused 
absolutely,  —  "he  could  not  consent  to  become 
the  successor  of  General  Rosecrans,  because  he 
would  not  do  anything  to  give  countenance  to  the 
suspicion  that  he  had  intrigued  against  his  com- 
mander. Besides,  he  has  as  perfect  confidence  in 
the  capacity  and  fidelity  of  Rosecrans  as  he  had  in 
those  of  General  Buell." 25  Even  when  it  would 
have  been  easy  and  natural  to  say  something  un- 
pleasant, Thomas  refrains,  as  in  commenting  on 
the  victory  of  Chattanooga,  won,  it  is  usually  sup- 
posed, quite  contrary  to  Grant's  plans.  "  It  will  be 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  113 

perceived  from  the  above  report  that  the  original 
plan  of  operations  was  somewhat  modified  to  meet 
and  take  the  best  advantage  of  emergencies,  which 
necessitated  material  modifications  of  that  plan.  It 
is  believed,  however,  that  the  original  plan,  had  it 
been  carried  out,  could  not  possibly  have  led  to 
more  successful  results." 26  . 

If,  as  is  sometimes  asserted,  Thomas  was  jealous 
of  Grant,  the  moderation  of  the  above  passage  is 
all  the  more  noticeable.  That  there  was  a  certain 
amount  of  the  very  human  jealousy  I  have  sug- 
gested above  is  possible.  How  difficult  it  is  to 
discriminate  motives  in  such  a  case  is  shown  by 
comparing  General  J.  H.  Wilson's  description  of 
Grant's  first  arrival  at  Chattanooga,  wet,  weary, 
and  wounded,  and  Thomas's  reception  of  him, 
with  Horace  Porter's  account  of  the  same  scene. 
According  to  General  Wilson,  Thomas  was  com- 
pletely out  of  sorts  and  treated  Grant  with  in- 
excusable rudeness,  arising,  Wilson  thinks,  from 
smouldering  jealousy.27  Porter,  on  the  other  hand, 
feels  that  the  undeniable  discourtesy  on  Thomas's 
part  sprang  rather  from  preoccupation  with  other 
cares,28  and  he  analyzes  excellently  the  probable 
facts  as  to  the  relations  between  the  two  great 
leaders.  "There  is  very  little  doubt  that  if  any 
other  two  general  officers  in  the  service  had  been 
placed  in  the  same  trying  circumstances  there" 
would  have  been  an  open  rupture." 29 


114  UNION  PORTRAITS 

III 

So  far,  then,  as  to  the  negative  advantages  of 
Thomas's  reserve  and  self-control.  But  the  pos- 
itive advantages  were  much  greater.  To  begin 
with,  he  was  by  nature  businesslike,  a  man  of 
system.  The  story  that  his  chief  complaint  of  the 
enemy  at  Chickamauga,  when  everything  was  col- 
lapsing about  him,  was  that  "the  damned  scoun- 
drels are  fighting  without  any  system," 30  may  be 
apocryphal,  though  I  am  inclined  to  believe  it. 
But  all  the  evidence  shows  that  he  loved  to  have 
things  work  by  rule  and  arranged  even  little  mat- 
ters with  patient  care.  He  was  always  neat  about 
his  dress  and  person.  He  liked  a  completeness  even 
approaching  display  about  his  camp  service  and 
equipage,  had  formal  negro  attendants  and  silver 
tableware.  All  Sherman's  efforts  to  reduce  this 
equipment  for  the  sake  of  example  during  the 
Atlanta  campaign  were  quite  unavailing,  yet  it 
does  not  seem  to  have  resulted  from  any  instinct 
of  aristocratic  superiority,  simply  from  an  estab- 
lished habit.  In  the  same  way  Thomas  insisted 
upon  an  elaborate  administrative  apparatus,  and 
the  story  goes  that  Sherman,  after  unduly  strip- 
ping himself,  was  very  glad  to  make  use  of  his 
subordinate's  facilities. 

It  was  the  same  with  discipline.  Thomas  was 
always  approachable,  always  kindly,  but  he 
wanted  no  time  spent  without  a  purpose,  and  even 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  115 

in  accomplishing  a  purpose  wanted  methods  to  be 
brief  and  direct.  This  thoroughly  businesslike  ele- 
ment of  his  character  is  shown  by  nothing  better 
than  by  the  change  which  is  said  to  have  taken 
place  in  the  army  when  Thomas  succeeded  Rose- 
crans.  Rosecrans  was  brilliant  but  erratic,  full  of 
clever  schemes,  but  without  settled  grasp  on  either 
men  or  movements.  Under"  his  control,  or  lack  of 
it,  administration  had  become  dangerously  hap- 
hazard. With  Thomas's  appointment  everything 
was  altered.  As  Dana  wrote,  in  his  vivid  fashion, 
"order  prevails  instead  of  universal  chaos." 31 

It  was  Thomas's  habit,  before  starting  on  any 
considerable  movement,  to  see  that  all  pending 
matters  of  business  were  attended  to,  all  papers 
properly  arranged,  his  own  signature  affixed  to 
every  document  that  required  it.32  Even  matters 
of  comparatively  slight  importance  were  not  over- 
looked. Thus,  on  the  morning  of  December  15, 
1864,  when  he  was  riding  through  Nashville  to 
begin  the  battle  which  he  knew  was  the  great  and 
long-delayed  crisis  of  his  life,  he  stopped  his  whole 
staff  in  the  street  to  give  direction  that  fourteen 
bushels  of  coal  should  be  sent  to  Mr.  Harris,  his 
neighbor;  "I  was  out  of  coal  and  borrowed  this 
number  of  bushels  from  him  the  other  day."  33 
Has  not  such  an  anecdote  the  real  ring  of  Plutarch, 
is  it  not  as  fine  as  Socrates's  last  payment  of  the 
cock  to  ^Esculapius? 

This  thoroughness  of  method,  of  course,  shows 


116  UNION  PORTRAITS 

in  all  Thomas's  military  activity.  "The  fate  of  a 
battle  may  depend  on  a  buckle/'  he  once  said  to  an 
officer  whose  harness  broke.34  He  wanted  to  know 
where  he  was  going,  whom  he  was  going  with, 
what  material  he  had  with  him  and  against  him. 
He  provided  for  all  possible  contingencies  of  acci- 
dent. "  There  is  always  a  remedy  for  any  failure  of 
a  part  of  Thomas's  plans,  or  for  the  delinquencies 
of  subordinates."  35  He  left  nothing  to  others  that 
he  could  do  himself.  "On  a  march  or  a  campaign, 
he  saw  every  part  of  his  army  every  day.  ...  If , 
when  he  was  at  the  rear,  the  sounds  indicated  con- 
tact with  the  enemy,  he  passed  on  to  the  very 
front,  where  he  often  dismounted  and  walked  to 
the  outer  skirmish  line,  to  reconnoitre."  36  The 
extreme  of  this  methodical  care  is  shown  in  his 
curious  remark  to  Dana,  "I  should  have  long  since 
liked  to  have  had  an  independent  command,  but 
what  I  should  have  desired  would  have  been 
the  command  of  an  army  that  I  could  myself 
have  organized,  disciplined,  distributed,  and  com- 
bined." 37  It  is  a  striking  piece  of  irony  that  when 
Sherman  left  him  in  chief  command  to  confront 
Hood,  he  should  have  had  the  exact  opposite  of 
this,  an  unorganized,  incoherent,  scattered,  cha- 
otic army,  which  he  had  to  make  before  he  used 
it.  He  did  make  it,  shape  it,  put  it  together,  before 
he  would  stir  one  step.  Then  he  struck  the  most 
finished,  telling,  perfect  blow  that  was  struck  on 
either  side  during  the  war. 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  117 

And  the  natural  result  of  this  splendid  thorough- 
ness was  a  universal  reliability.  Everybody,  from 
the  commander-in-chief  to  the  camp  followers, 
trusted  Thomas.  When  he  telegraphed  to  Grant 
from  Chattanooga,  "We  will  hold  the  town  till 
we  starve,"  everybody  knew  there  was  no  bluster 
about  it,  everybody  knew  the  town  would  be  held. 
In  this  connection,  perhaps,  the  grandeur  and 
force  of  his  character  made  themselves  more  felt 
at  Chickamauga  than  even  at  Nashville.  When 
everything  is  marching  steadily  to  victory  accord- 
ing to  a  preconceived  plan,  you  may  know  the 
power  that  is  behind,  but  you  do  not  feel  it  directly 
and  vividly.  But  when  things  go  wrong,  when 
strong  men  are  breaking  blindly,  when  disaster 
seems  sweeping  on  beyond  check  or  stay,  then  to 
lean  back  against  one  magnificent  will,  of  itself 
sufficient  to  change  fate,  does  indeed  give  you  a 
sense  of  what  human  personality  can  be. 

It  is  in  moments  like  these  that  a  physique  such 
as  Thomas's,  with  all  it  expresses  of  the  soul,  is 
most  imposing.  He  was  tall,  broad,  solidly  built, 
with  firm,  square  shoulders,  and  a  full-bearded 
face  as  firm  and  square  as  the  shoulders  were. 
Some  say  the  expression  was  stern,  some  say  kind 
and  gentle.  Probably  it  could  be  either,  according 
to  circumstances,  and  I  delight  in  Garfield's  com- 
ment on  the  eyes,  "cold  gray  to  his  enemies,  but 
warm  deep  blue  to  his  friends."  38  Equally  enthu- 
siastic is  Howard's  denial  of  the  charge  of  coldness 


118  UNION  PORTRAITS 

and  severity:  "To  me  General  Thomas's  features 
never  seemed  'cold/  His  smile  of  welcome  was 
pleasant  and  most  cordial.  His  words  and  acts  of 
confidence  drew  toward  him  my  whole  heart,  par- 
ticularly when  I  went  into  battle  under  him."  39 
And  this  is  the  impression  that  I  get  most  of 
Thomas  as  a  battle-leader,  one  of  immense  com- 
fort. Others  may  have  been  more  showy,  even 
more  inspiring.  To  fight  under  Thomas  was  like 
having  a  wall  at  your  back  or  a  great  battery  to 
cover  you. 

IV 

Naturally,  characteristics  so  strongly  marked  as 
the  reserve  and  poise  and  self-control  we  have  been 
analyzing  in  Thomas  carry  some  defects  with  them. 
Strongly  marked  characteristics  always  do.  His 
love  of  system  and  the  regular  way  of  doing  things 
did  sometimes  degenerate  into  a  defect.  This 
shows  in  little  foibles  of  no  moment  except  for 
what  they  indicate.  Thus,  Thomas  was  walking 
one  day  with  Sherman  and  they  came  across  a 
soldier  parching  corn  from  the  fields.  Thomas 
commended  him,  but  advised  him  not  to  waste 
any.  As  they  passed  on,  Sherman  heard  the  fellow 
mutter,  "There  he  goes,  there  goes  the  old  man, 
economizing  as  usual."  And  Sherman's  charac- 
teristic comment  is,  "'Economizing'  with  corn, 
which  cost  only  the  labor  of  gathering  and  roast- 
ing." 40  Again,  it  is  said  that  Thomas  hated  new 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  119 

clothes,  and  when  his  promotions  began  to  come 
faster  than  he  could  wear  out  his  uniforms,  he 
was  always  one  uniform  behind.41  Of  similar  triv- 
iality, yet  significance,  is  the  story  that  when  he 
was  put  into  a  good  bed  in  a  Louisville  hotel,  he 
could  not  sleep,  but  sent  for  his  camp  cot  in  the 
middle  of  the  night.42  > 

More  important  in  this  line  is  his  criticism  of 
the  Sanitary  and  Christian  Commissions.  With  all 
their  usefulness,  they  were  something  of  a  trial 
from  the  point  of  view  of  system,  and  Thomas 
complains,  "They  have  caused  much  trouble  and 
could  be  easily  dispensed  with  for  the  good  of  the 
service,  as  their  duties  are  legitimately  those  of, 
and  should  be  performed  by,  the  medical  depart- 
ment." 43 

Most  illuminating  of  all  for  Thomas's  mental 
constitution  is  his  attitude  toward  rank,  promo- 
tion, and  official  dignity.  Advancement  was  slow 
in  coming  to  him  at  first,  partly,  perhaps,  because 
of  his  Southern  antecedents,  partly  also  because  of 
his  quiet  discharge  of  duty,  without  talk  or  politi- 
cal effort.  When  others  were  placed  over  him,  he 
made  no  protest  of  ambition  or  desire  and  was 
disposed  to  bear  slights  which  merely  touched  his 
personal  worth  with  dignified  indifference.  But 
the  minute  he  felt  that  the  regular  order  of  proce- 
dure was  interfered  with,  he  was  ready  to  object. 
Thus,  when  he  is  put  under  Mitchell,  in  1861,  he 
writes,  "Justice  to  myself  requires  that  I  ask  to  be 


120  UNION  PORTRAITS 

relieved  from  duty  with  these  troops,  since  the 
Secretary  has  thought  it  necessary  to  supersede 
me  in  the  command,  without,  as  I  conceive,  any 
just  cause  for  so  doing."  44 

At  a  later  date  he  is  subordinated  to  Rosecrans 
and  protests  in  the  same  spirit:  "Although  I  do  not 
claim  for  myself  any  superior  ability,  yet  feeling 
conscious  that  no  just  cause  exists  for  overslaugh- 
ing me  by  placing  me  under  my  junior,  I  feel 
deeply  mortified  and  aggrieved  at  the  action  in 
this  matter/'  45  This,  I  think,  shows  clearly  the 
instinct  of  system  tending  to  harden  into  a  red- 
tape  habit.  We  can  all  imagine  how  differently 
Sherman  would  have  written  under  similar  cir- 
cumstances, perhaps  as  follows:  I  don't  care  a 
damn  whether  the  man  is  my  senior  or  my  junior. 
The  one  question  is,  can  he  do  the  work  better  than 
I?  To  speak  frankly,  I  don't  think  he  can. 

Another  curious  case  is  Thomas's  insistence  on 
being  transferred  to  the  Pacific  Department  after 
the  war.  His  biographer  admits  that  he  did  not 
wish  to  go  there,  but  was  merely  unwilling  to  see 
his  rank  degraded  by  having  Schofield  given  the 
higher  appointment.46 

And  Thomas's  methodical  temper  is  sometimes 
asserted  to  have  given  rise  to  a  defect  even  more 
serious,  that  of  excessive  deliberateness,  not  to  say 
slowness  in  action.  This  much-debated  point  is 
too  purely  military  for  a  civilian  to  settle,  but  some 
discussion  of  it  is  necessary. 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  121 

Perhaps  the  most  severe  criticism  of  Thomas 
comes  from  his  own  subordinate,  Schofield,  in 
connection  with  the  Nashville  campaign.  Summed 
up  very  briefly  and  stripped  of  politeness,  Schofield 
charges  that  Thomas  should  have  concentrated 
and  fought  Hood  earlier,  that  Schofield  himself 
really  won  Nashville  at  Franklin,  that  when  Nash- 
ville was  fought  it  was  Schofield's  advice  that 
made  the  victory  complete,  that  on  the  second  day 
of  the  battle  Thomas's  leadership  was  quite  inade- 
quate, and  that  Thomas's  reports  cannot  have 
been  written  by  himself,  because  he  would  have 
been  incapable  of  omitting  to  give  credit  for  his 
subordinate's  achievements,  a  civil  way  of  insinu- 
ating that  Thomas  suppressed  the  truth.  All  this 
would  be  indeed  overwhelming,  if  exact. 

Milder  critics  insist  that  Thomas  was  slow  at 
Nashville,  notably  Grant,  both  at  the  time  and 
afterwards,  repeating  to  Young  the  old  story  of  the 
general's  nickname  of  "Slow-Trot  Thomas/'  ac- 
quired at  West  Point.47  But  Grant  was  apt  to 
couple  Thomas's  name  with  some  innuendo,  as 
was  Sherman,  who,  though  often  praising  his  sub- 
ordinate's steadiness,  complains  of  the  difficulty 
of  keeping  him  moving.  "A  fresh  furrow  in  a 
plowed  field  will  stop  the  whole  column,  and  all 
begin  to  intrench." 48 

Cox,  who  knew  Thomas  well  and  admired  him 
much  and  who  has  none  of  Schofield's  obvious 
personal  irritation,  is  inclined  to  agree  with  the 


122  UNION  PORTRAITS 

latter  that  the  general  might  have  met  and  de- 
feated Hood  more  promptly.  And  Colonel  T.  L. 
Livermore,  after  his  minute  and  careful  analysis 
of  Thomas's  whole  career,  inclines  to  the  belief 
that  in  almost  every  one  of  his  battles  he  might 
have  accomplished  more  than  he  did,  this  being 
particularly  the  case  in  regard  to  Chickamauga. 
Colonel  Livermore,  however,  admits  that  Thomas's 
greatness  deserves  all  admiration  and  that  no  one 
would  question  it,  if  it  were  not  for  the  fact  that 
his  biographers  try  to  exalt  him  by  depreciating 
everybody  else.  This  they  certainly  do,  with  more 
ardor  than  discernment. 

On  the  point  of  generalship  I  think  we  may  con- 
clude that,  while  perhaps  Thomas  had  not  the 
headlong  aggressiveness  of  Sherman  and  Sheridan, 
of  Jackson  and  Stuart,  he  had  gifts  so  great,  so 
successful,  and  so  fruitful,  gifts  not  only  of  steadi- 
ness and  far  reaching  preparation,  but  also  of 
broad  conception  and  strategic  intelligence,  that 
to  find  fault  with  him  is  an  ungracious  and  a  thank- 
less task. 

v 

So  far  we  have  considered  Thomas  as  a  man  of 
reserved  power,  of  poise  and  self-control,  and  there 
is  a  general  impression  that  he  was  cold  and  stolid, 
of  a  statuesque  temperament,  little  subject  to  hu- 
man passion  and  infirmity.  Careful  study  shows 
that  this  is  less  true  than  might  be  supposed.  The 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  123 

human  passions  were  there,  however  watchfully 
governed. 

Take  ambition.  Few  men  seem  to  have  been 
freer  from  its  subtle  influence.  Thomas  declined 
advancement  when  he  thought  it  unjust  to  others, 
declined  to  be  put  in  Buell's  place,  declined  to  be 
put  in  Rosecrans's,  declined  to  let  Johnson  set  him 
up  as  lieutenant-general  to  interfere  with  Grant. 
He  declined  a  nomination  for  the  Presidency  be- 
cause he  felt  himself  not  fitted  for  it.  Nor  did  the 
more  solid  fruits  of  ambition  tempt  him.  After 
the  war  he  was  offered  a  handsome  house,  but  de- 
clined it.  A  large  sum  of  money  was  raised  for  him. 
He  declined  it,  though  poor,  and  desired  it  to  be 
expended  for  the  relief  of  disabled  soliders. 

Yet  in  one  of  the  few  letters  that  have  come  to 
us  from  his  early  days,  there  is  a  real  human  cry: 
"  This  will  be  the  only  opportunity  I  shall  have  of 
distinguishing  myself,  and  not  to  be  able  to  avail 
myself  of  it  is  too  bad/' 49  And  there  is  something 
equally  human  about  a  disclaimer  of  ambition  in 
later  days:  "I  have  exhibited  at  least  sufficient 
energy  to  show  that  if  I  had  been  entrusted  with 
the  command  of  the  expedition  at  that  time,  ...  I 
might  have  conducted  it  successfully.  ...  I  went 
to  my  duty  without  a  murmur,  as  I  am  neither 
ambitious  nor  have  any  political  aspirations."50 
Now  don't  you  think  perhaps  he  was  a  little  ambi- 
tious, after  all? 

Again,  take  temper.   Thomas  had  plenty  of  it 


124  UNION  PORTRAITS 

under  his  outward  calm.  His  vexatious  biogra- 
phers declare  that,  although  no  church  member, 
he  was  devoutly  religious  and  used  and  allowed  no 
profanity.  I  have  no  question  as  to  the  religion, 
but  I  have  quoted  some  profanity  above  which 
sounds  genuine  —  and  good  —  to  me,  and  there  is 
more  elsewhere.  Also,  there  is  evidence  of  magnifi- 
cent temper.  It  is  said  that  at  West  Point  the 
young  cadet  threatened  to  throw  a  would-be  hazer 
out  of  the  window,51  but  this  may  have  been  not 
temper,  but  policy.  Later  instances  are  indisput- 
able. When  an  officer  of  his  staff  misappropriated 
a  horse,  the  general  overwhelmed  him  with  a  tor- 
rent of  reproach,  drew  his  sword,  ripped  off  the 
officer's  shoulder-straps,  and  forced  him  to  dis- 
mount and  lead  the  horse  a  long  distance  to  its 
owner.52  On  another  occasion  a  teamster  was 
beating  his  mules  over  the  head  when  the  com- 
mander fell  upon  him  with  such  a  tumult  of  invec- 
tive that  the  fellow  fled  to  the  woods  and  disap- 
peared.53 

But  the  most  interesting  evidence  as  to  Thomas's 
temper  is  his  own  self -confession  in  the  admirable 
letter  he  wrote  declining  a  nomination  for  the 
Presidency  after  the  war.  He  gives  a  list  of  his 
disqualifications  and  places  prominently  among 
them,  "I  have  not  the  necessary  control  over  my 
temper/'  adding  this  really  delightful  piece  of 
self -analysis:  "My  habits  of  life,  established  by 
a  military  training  of  over  twenty-five  years,  are 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  125 

such  as  to  make  it  repugnant  to  my  self-respect  to 
have  to  induce  people  to  do  their  duty  by  persua- 
sive measures.  If  there  is  anything  that  enrages 
me  more  than  another,  it  is  to  see  an  obstinate  and 
self-willed  man  opposing  what  is  right,  morally  and 
legally,  simply  because  under  the  law  he  cannot 
be  compelled  to  do  what  is  right/' 54  Perhaps  he 
would  not  have  made  a  good  President  of  the 
United  States,  since  that  individual  must  be  sub- 
jected to  visions  of  the  above  nature  at  rather 
frequent  intervals. 

Thomas  was  human  in  other  aspects,  also.  He 
took  a  real  human  joy  in  fighting  and  victory. 
When  the  arrival  of  A.  J.  Smith  assured  success 
at  Nashville,  Thomas  took  Smith  in  his  arms  and 
hugged  him.55  How  pretty  is  the  story  Shanks 
tells  of  the  general's  eagerness  in  reporting  Chicka- 
mauga  to  Rosecrans.  "Whenever  I  touched  their 
flanks,  they  broke,  general,  they  broke."  Then, 
catching  Shanks's  eye  fixed  upon  him,  "as  if 
ashamed  of  his  momentary  enthusiasm,  the  blood 
mounted  to  his  cheeks  and  he  blushed  like  a 
woman."  56  Sherman  says  that  when  Atlanta  was 
taken,  "the  news  seemed  to  Thomas  almost  too 
good  to  be  true.  He  snapped  his  fingers,  whistled, 
and  almost  danced."  57  The  image  of  Thomas 
dancing  is  of  a  peculiar  gayety.  Yet  I  have  seen 
just  such  men  do  just  such  things. 

As  to  the  sense  of  humor,  some  maintain  that 
Thomas  had  it  not.  Everybody  has  it,  if  you  can 


126  UNION  PORTRAITS 

find  it.  According  to  Horace  Porter,  the  general 
took  great  delight  in  the  jokes  of  a  vaudeville  enter- 
tainment with  which  the  officers  whiled  away  camp 
tediousness.  One  story  told  by  Keyes,  though 
homely,  is  so  accordant  to  Thomas's  methodical 
and  mathematical  temperament  that  I  cannot 
omit  it.  Keyes  was  looking  for  a  certain  officer  who 
was  a  great  chewer  and  spitter,  and  as  he  sat  at  his 
desk,  spat  in  winter  into  the  fireplace,  in  summer 
out  of  the  window.  "Now,"  said  Thomas,  "you 
may  come  in  at  the  window  and  follow  up  the  line 
of  tobacco  juice  on  the  floor,  or  you  may  descend 
the  chimney  and  trace  from  that,  and  at  the 
intersection  of  the  two  lines  you  will  discover 

B ."  58   Something  in  the  anecdote  seems  to 

show  something  in  the  man. 

If  there  is  doubt  about  Thomas's  humor,  there 
is  none  whatever  about  his  sensibility.  It  was, 
indeed,  limited  in  character.  He  was  a  soldier  and 
little  else,  and  I  find  no  trace  in  him  of  responsive- 
ness to  literature  or  art  or  even  the  beauty  of  na- 
ture. Though  an  industrious  reader,  his  reading 
was  mainly  confined  to  his  own  profession  and  re- 
lated subjects,  for  instance,  military  and  constitu- 
tional law,  in  which  he  was  well  versed.  But  as  a 
man  and  a  soldier,  his  feelings  were  of  the  keenest. 
The  most  striking  testimony  to  this  is  the  con- 
temporary observation  of  Quartermaster  Donald- 
son, writing  to  his  superior  Meigs,  of  a  conversa- 
tion held  with  the  general  in  January,  1865:  "He 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  127 

feels  very  sore  at  the  rumored  intentions  to  re- 
lieve him,  and  the  major-generalcy  does  not  cica- 
trize the  wound.  You  know  Thomas  is  morbidly 
sensitive,  and  it  cuts  him  to  the  heart  to  think  that 
it  was  contemplated  to  remove  him.  He  does  not 
blame  the  Secretary,  for  he  said  Mr.  Stanton  was 
a  fair  and  just  man."  59  The  last  sentence  is  as 
nobly  characteristic  as  the  preceding  one.  But 
the  sensitiveness  was  there  and  shows  repeatedly 
under  the  stoical  calm,  as  in  the  remark  just  be- 
fore Nashville,  "  Wilson,  they  treat  me  at  Washing- 
ton and  at  Grant's  headquarters  as  though  I  were 
a  boy/' 60  and  in  the  retort  to  Stanton,  when  they 
met  after  the  war  was  over  and  the  Secretary  de- 
clared that  he  had  always  trusted  the  general: 
"Mr.  Stanton,  I  am  sorry  to  hear  you  make  this 
statement.  I  have  not  been  treated  as  if  you  had 
confidence  in  me." 61  Also,  the  general  showed  a 
very  human  susceptibility  in  his  resentment  at 
being  criticized  by  Schofield.62 

And  as  Thomas  was  sensitive,  so  he  was  kindly 
and  tender,  though  his  grave  manner  sometimes 
bred  the  contrary  opinion.  Sherman  even  de- 
clares that  he  was  too  kind  for  discipline  and  that 
at  his  headquarters  everybody  was  allowed  to 
do  as  he  pleased.63  This  is  Sherman's  exaggera- 
tion, but  Thomas  was  kind  to  officers  and  men, 
kind,  considerate,  approachable.  The  consideration 
showed  in  things  slight,  but  eminently  significant. 
For  instance,  it  is  said  that  on  the  march,  if  the 


128  UNION  PORTRAITS 

general  was  riding  hastily  to  the  front,  he  would 
take  his  staff  through  swamps  and  thickets,  and 
leave  the  highway  to  the  trudging  soldiers.64  So, 
after  the  war,  he  was  thoughtful  both  of  his  old 
followers  and  of  the  enemy.  And  the  proof  of  this 
is  that  not  only  his  followers  adored  "Old  Pap," 
but  that,  in  spite  of  excellent  grounds  of  animosity, 
Southerners  generally  speak  of  him  with  more  ad- 
miration and  respect  than  of  almost  any  other 
Northern  commander. 

Nor,  in  dwelling  on  Thomas's  kindness,  should 
we  omit  one  most  important  feature  of  it,  his 
tender  regard  for  animals.  Maltreatment  of  them 
roused  him  to  fierce  indignation,  and  horses,  mules, 
dogs,  cats,  and  even  fowls,  looked  upon  him  as 
their  peculiar  friend  and  protector. 

I  wish  I  could  say  something  about  the  gen- 
eral's more  intimate  personal  relations.  But  he 
would  have  nothing  published  bearing  upon  them 
and  it  is  right  that  his  reticence  should  be  re- 
spected, though  I  feel  sure  that  the  more  closely 
we  studied  him,  the  more  we  should  love  him. 
Oddly  enough,  purely  personal  material  does  not 
often  get  into  the  "Official  Records,"  yet  with 
Thomas,  most  secretive  of  men,  we  have  one  of 
the  few  documents  that  seem  to  speak  directly 
from  one  heart  to  another.  Among  the  formal  cor- 
respondence bearing  upon  the  battle  of  Nashville 
we  find  the  following  brief  dispatch,  hitherto  over- 
looked by  the  general's  biographers:  "Mrs.  F.  L. 


GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS  129 

Thomas,  New  York  Hotel,  New  York:  We  hav< 
whipped  the  enemy,  taken  many  prisoners  and 
considerable  artillery."  65  These  are  bare  and 
simple  words.  But  when  I  think  who  wrote  them, 
who  read  them,  and  all  they  meant,  they  bring 
tears  to  my  eyes  at  any  rate. 

So  now  we  understand  that  this  high-souled 
gentleman,  for  all  his  dignity  and  all  his  serenity, 
was  neither  cold  nor  stolid,  and  we  are  better  pre- 
pared to  understand  the  startling  significance  of 
his  brief  remark  to  one  who  was  very  close  to  him, 
"Colonel,  I  have  taken  a  great  deal  of  pains  to 
educate  myself  not  to  feel."  66 

Truly  a  royal  and  heroic  figure  and  one  for  all 
Americans  to  be  proud  of.  Is  it  not,  indeed,  an 
immortal  glory  for  Virginia  to  have  produced  the 
noblest  soldier  of  the  Revolution  and  the  noblest 
that  fought  for  the  North  in  the  Civil  War,  as  well 
as  the  noblest  that  fought  for  the  South?  Some  day 
I  hope  to  see  her  erect  a  worthy  monument  to  one 
of  the  greatest  of  her  sons.  But,  as  she  grows  every 
year  richer,  more  prosperous,  more  fortunate, 
more  loyal  in  the  Union  for  which  he  helped  to 
save  her,  she  herself,  whether  she  wills  it  or  not, 
will  more  and  more  become  his  proudest  monu- 
ment. 


V 

WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Lancaster,  Ohio,  February  8, 1820. 

Graduated  at  West  Point,  1840. 

In  California,  1847-50. 

Married  Ellen  Boyle  Ewing,  May  1, 1850. 

Numerous  occupations  till  1859. 

President  Louisiana  Military  Academy,  1859-61. 

Colonel  at  Bull  Run,  1861. 

Prominent  at  Shiloh,  Vicksburg,  Chattanooga. 

Commanded  in  Georgia  and  the  Carolinas,  1864,  1865. 

Received  Johnston's  surrender,  April  26,  1865. 

Appointed  general  of  all  armies  March  5,  1869. 

Wrote  "Memoirs,"  1875. 

Revised  "Memoirs,"  1885. 

Died,  February  14,  1891. 


V 

WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN 
I 

IT  is  curious  to  turn  from  the  study  of  Thomas 
to  the  study  of  Sherman.  Thomas  instinctively 
hides  himself.  To  get  at  his  soul  you  have  to 
watch  keenly,  to  pick  up  fine  threads  of  self -reve- 
lation in  a  waste  of  conventional  formality  and 
follow  their  light  tissue  with  the  closest  care. 
Sherman  turns  himself  inside  out  even  in  an  offi- 
cial document.  He  wore  his  coat  unbuttoned  and 
his  heart  also,  exposed  its  inmost  linings  to  all  the 
winds  of  heaven  —  and  all  the  eyes  of  curious  re- 
porters, whom  he  detested  for  seeing  and  record- 
ing what  was  there  and  what  was  not.  This  per- 
petual exposure  is  almost  as  baffling  as  Thomas's 
concealment,  though  in  another  fashion.  We  like 
a  soul  to  be  open,  and  clean,  and  windblown.  But 
I  am  not  sure  that  we  like  to  see  it  always  thrash- 
ing on  the  clothesline. 

"Typically  American"  is  a  loose  term  and  gets 
looser  every  day.  But  Ropes  and  many  others  have 
applied  it  to  Sherman,  and  with  singular  justice. 
Few  figures  of  the  war  have  more  marked  Ameri- 
can characteristics  than  he.  Lincoln  is  often  in- 
stanced. But  Lincoln  had  strange  depths,  even 


134  UNION  PORTRAITS 

yet  unexplored,  which  do  not  seem  American  at 
all.  Grant  was  too  quiet. 

Sherman  was  never  quiet,  physically  or  mentally. 
Like  so  many  Americans  who  do  things,  he  had  not 
robust  health.  In  1846,  on  his  way  to  California, 
he  gave  up  smoking.  "The  reason  was,  it  hurt  my 
breast.  .  .  .  The  habit  shall  never  be  resumed."  1 
It  was  resumed,  and  given  up  again,  and  inveterate, 
as  the  hurt  was.  But  no  hurt  made  flag  that  in- 
defatigable, unfaltering,  resistless  energy.  "  Blessed 
with  a  vitality  that  only  yields  to  absolute  death/' 
he  says  of  himself.2  Assuredly  he  was  so  blessed. 
One  who  did  not  love  him  observed,  "With  a  clear 
idea  of  what  he  wanted  and  an  unyielding  deter- 
mination to  have  it,  he  made  himself  and  every- 
body around  him  uncomfortable,  till  his  demands 
were  gratified." 3 

His  character  was  written  all  over  him.  The 
tall,  spare,  wiry  figure,  the  fine-featured,  wrinkle- 
netted  face,  expressed  the  man.  He  had  auburn 
hair,  and  one  lock  of  it  behind  would  stick  straight 
out,  when  he  was  eager  or  excited.  I  never  think 
of  Sherman  without  seeing  that  lock. 

His  manner  was  even  more  expressive  than  his 
features.  He  was  always  in  movement  when  he 
talked,  striding  up  and  down,  if  possible,  if  not, 
moving  head  or  hands  or  feet.  When  Horace 
Porter  first  came  to  him  from  Grant,  he  found 
Sherman  in  his  slippers,  reading  a  newspaper,  and 
all  through  the  conversation  the  newspaper  was 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         135 

frantically  brandished  and  one  foot  was  in  and  out 
of  the  slipper  perpetually.4  The  general's  talk  was 
always  hurried,  vigorous,  incisive,  punctuated  with 
strange,  sharp,  and  uncouth  gestures.  "In  giving 
his  instructions  and  orders/'  says  one  acute  ob- 
server, "he  will  take  a  person  by  the  shoulder  and 
push  him  off  as  he  talks,  follow  him  to  the  door, 
all  the  time  talking  and  urging  him  away.  His 
quick,  restless  manner  almost  invariably  results 
in  the  confusion  of  the  person  whom  he  is  thus 
instructing,  but  Sherman  himself  never  gets  con- 
fused. At  the  same  time,  he  never  gets  composed." 5 

As  he  was  American  in  look  and  manner,  so  he 
was  eminently  American  in  the  movement  of  his 
life.  He  himself  writes,  "It  does  seem  that  na- 
ture for  some  wise  purpose  .  .  .  does  ordain  that 
man  shall  migrate,  clear  out  from  the  place  of  his 
birth."  6  He  migrated,  at  any  rate,  like  a  bird,  or 
the  thought  of  a  poet.  Born  in  Ohio,  in  1820,  he 
passed  apparently  a  tranquil  boyhood.  But  with 
youth  his  adventures  began.  From  West  Point 
he  went  to  Florida,  from  Florida  to  South  Caro- 
lina. Then  came  California,  then  New  York,  then 
New  Orleans,  California  again,  New  York  again, 
St.  Louis,  and  again  New  Orleans.  Remember, 
that  in  those  days  the  journey  from  New  York  to 
San  Francisco  was  like  a  journey  round  the  world 
at  present. 

Nor  was  all  this  divagation  merely  military. 
Sherman  was  soldier  only  in  part.  At  other  times 


136  UNION  PORTRAITS 

he  was  banker,  fanner,  lawyer,  president  of  a  rail- 
road, president  of  a  college.  Only  heroic  self- 
restraint  saved  him  from  being  an  artist.  "  I  have 
great  love  for  painting  and  find  that  sometimes  I 
am  so  fascinated  that  it  amounts  to  pain  to  lay 
down  the  brush,  placing  me  in  doubt  whether  I 
had  better  stop  now  before  it  swallows  all  atten- 
tion, to  the  neglect  of  my  duties,  and  discard  it 
altogether,  or  keep  on.  What  would  you  advise?"  7 
Here  is  the  first  and  last  time  he  ever  mentions 
painting. 

After  this  twenty  years'  Odyssey,  just  at  the 
beginning  of  the  war  he  gets  a  spell  at  home  with 
Penelope  and  the  budding  Telemachus,  and  ob- 
serves —  with  a  sigh:  "I  must  try  and  allay  that 
feeling  of  change  and  venture  that  has  made  me 
a  wanderer.  If  possible  I  will  settle  down  —  fast 
and  positive."  8 

The  war  comes.  He  rides  and  rages  through 
Bull  Run,  Shiloh,  Vicksburg,  Chattanooga,  like 
a  comet  through  Georgia  and  the  Carolinas,  to  the 
highest  war  can  give  him  and  to  peace.  But  he 
never  settles  down  —  never. 

II 

Some  men  whose  feet  are  thus  tirelessly  wan- 
dering tread  a  very  narrow  region  in  their  minds, 
just  as  others'  minds  rove  widely,  while  their  feet 
are  still.  With  Sherman  there  was  incessant  move- 
ment of  both  mind  and  body.  He  had  the  busiest 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         137 

imagination  in  all  these  various  careers,  saw  all 
possibilities  of  chance  and  accident  and  endeavored 
to  provide  for  them,  turned  over  a  dozen  courses  of 
action  before  he  hit  the  one  that  would  answer  his 
purpose  best.  At  the  beginning  of  the  war  others 
tried  to  accomplish  full  results  with  half  measures, 
could  not  stretch  prevision  to  the  scope  of  effort 
necessary  to  avert  the  immense  train  of  damage 
and  disaster.  Sherman  saw  and  foresaw  every- 
thing, and  because  he  predicted  the  vastness  of  the 
struggle  and  demanded  means  adequate  to  meet 
it,  those  in  authority  and  the  press  men,  whose 
imagination  was  always  immensely  busy  at  short 
range,  decried  and  almost  displaced  him  as  a  sheer, 
unbalanced  lunatic. 

All  through  the  war  this  acute  imagination  of 
military  possibility  and  necessity  marked  him 
more  than  almost  any  one.  Sometimes,  doubtless, 
it  led  him  to  curious  extremes,  as  in  his  advice  to 
Sheridan,  in  November,  1864:  "I  am  satisfied,  and 
have  been  all  the  time,  that  the  problem  of  this 
war  consists  in  the  awful  fact  that  the  present 
class  of  men  who  rule  the  South  must  be  killed 
outright  rather  than  in  the  conquest  of  territory; 
. .  .  therefore  I  shall  expect  you  on  any  and  all 
occasions  to  make  bloody  results." 9 

An  imagination  so  vivid  and  energetic  has  its 
dangers.  One  is  the  misrepresentation  of  fact, 
especially  in  the  past.  Perhaps  Sherman  was  too 
careless  in  this  matter.  His  attitude  is  partly  in- 


138  UNION  PORTRAITS 

dicated  in  his  remark  to  a  newspaper  man,  who 
had  written  a  sketch  of  him :  "  You  make  more  than 
a  dozen  mistakes  of  facts,  which  I  need  not  correct 
as  I  don't  desire  my  biography  till  I  am  dead."  10 
This  is  all  very  well,  but  if  a  man  does  not  correct 
his  biography  while  living,  his  chance  of  doing  so 
later  is  limited.  Sherman's  "Memoirs"  have  been 
bitterly  attacked  on  this  score  of  inaccuracy. 
"His  story  is  ...  often  widely  at  variance  with 
the  '  Official  Records/  and  with  every  one's  recol- 
lection, except  his  own/'  says  Colonel  Stone;  u 
and  Professor  Royce's  comment  on  the  Calif ornian 
portion  is,  "  In  fact,  not  only  antecedent  proba- 
bility, but  sound  testimony,  is  against  General 
Sherman's  memory,  a  memory  which,  for  the  rest, 
was  hardly  meant  by  the  Creator  for  purely  his- 
torical purposes,  genial  and  amusing  though  its 
productions  may  be." 12 

The  general's  remark,  in  the  preface  to  the  re- 
vised edition  of  the  "Memoirs"  —  revised  chiefly 
by  the  printing  of  protests  in  an  appendix  —  is 
most  happily  characteristic.  I  am,  he  says  in  sub- 
stance, writing  my  own  memoirs,  not  those  of 
other  people. 

As  to  this  question  of  accuracy,  however,  it  is 
essential  not  to  overlook  the  testimony  of  Grant, 
who  declared  that  Sherman  was  a  very  accurate 
man,  that  he  always  kept  a  diary,  and  that  the 
"Memoirs"  were  founded  on  that  diary  in  all 
matters  of  fact.13 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         139 

Another  serious  danger  of  an  active  imagination 
is  that  it  may  go  far  outside  the  province  that  be- 
longs to  it.  This  was  certainly  the  tendency  of 
Sherman's.  Not  content  with  giving  sleepless  hours 
to  devising  all  sorts  of  schemes  for  the  military 
destruction  of  the  enemy,  he  ranged  far  into  the 
political  field,  conceived  and  ceaselessly  suggested 
measures  financial  and  administrative,  which 
would  aid  in  bringing  about  the  military  result. 
Many  other  generals  had  this  habit,  just  as  many 
politicians  contrived  to  win  victories  in  a  back 
corner  of  an  office;  but  few  whirled  out  of  their 
proper  orbit  with  such  breakneck  velocity  as 
Sherman.  He  was  always  delivering  huge  screeds 
of  political  comment,  oral  or  written,  to  the  North, 
to  the  South,  to  soldiers,  to  civilians,  to  officials, 
to  laymen.  Hear  one  of  his  wildest  outbursts  on 
the  general  conduct  of  the  war:  "To  secure  the 
safety  of  the  navigation  of  the  Mississippi  River 
I  would  slay  millions.  On  that  point  I  am  not  only 
insane,  but  mad.  .  .  .  For  every  bullet  shot  at  a 
steamboat,  I  would  shoot  a  thousand  30-pounder 
Parrotts  into  even  helpless  towns  on  Red,  Oua- 
chita,  Yazoo,  or  wherever  a  boat  can  float  or  sol- 
dier march." 14  Do  you  wonder  that  some  thought 
the  general  a  little  unreliable? 

Hear  him  again  on  the  deserts  of  the  South:  "To 
the  petulant  and  persistent  secessionists,  why, 
death  is  mercy,  and  the  quicker  he  or  she  is  dis- 
posed of  the  better.  Satan  and  the  rebellious  saints 


140  UNION  PORTRAITS 

of  heaven  were  allowed  a  continuous  existence  in 
hell  merely  to  swell  their  just  punishment.  To 
such  as  would  rebel  against  a  government  so  mild 
and  just  as  ours  was  in  peace,  a  punishment  equal 
would  not  be  unjust."  15 

It  is  this  abstract  and  imaginative  fury,  con- 
stantly suggesting  the  doctrinaire  idealists  of  the 
French  Revolution,  which  makes  Sherman  appear 
decidedly  at  a  disadvantage  in  his  correspondence 
with  Hood  as  to  the  treatment  of  Atlanta  and 
again  in  the  correspondence  with  Hardee  before 
Savannah. 

As  to  details  of  policy  there  is  the  same  fertility 
of  suggestion,  the  same  imperious  decisiveness. 
Finance?  Are  you  short  of  currency?  Use  cotton. 
Tie  it  up  in  neat  weighed  bales,  and  it  will  be  at 
least  better  than  your  Confederate  shinplasters.16 
The  draft?  The  draft?  Certainly  enforce  the 
draft.  "Unless  you  enact  a  law  denying  to  all 
citizens,  between  the  ages  of  eighteen  and  forty- 
five  who  do  not  enlist  and  serve  three  years  faith- 
fully, all  right  of  suffrage,  or  to  hold  office  after 
the  war  is  over,  you  will  have  trouble."17  Nig- 
gers? Now,  what  can  you  do  with  niggers?  They 
are  not  fit  for  soldiers,  they  are  not  fit  for  citizens, 
they  are  just  fit  for  labor  that  white  men  cannot 
do.  "I  would  not  if  I  could  abolish  or  modify 
slavery,"  he  wrote  in  December,  1859.18 

The  influence  of  all  this  varied  thinking  was 
doubled  by  a  really  daemonic  power  of  expression. 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         141 

Sherman's  dispatches  become  letters,  his  letters 
pamphlets.  Some  accuse  him  of  loquacity.  This 
is  absurd.  His  style  is  vigorous,  pointed,  energetic 
as  his  person.  His  abundance  of  words,  great  as  it 
is,  is  lame  and  impotent  to  the  hurry  of  his  thought. 
This  is  the  real  significance  of  his  ludicrous  re- 
mark, "I  am  not  much  of  a  talker/'19  and  again, 
"Excuse  so  long  a  letter,  which  is  very  unusual 
from  me."20  Not  much  of  a  talker!  Oh,  ye  gods! 
The  point  really  is  that  he  talked  vastly  much, 
but  he  could  have  talked  vastly  more.  On  the 
whole,  I  thank  Heaven  he  did  not. 

Those  at  whom  he  launched  these  verbal  whirl- 
winds did  not  always  appreciate  them,  or  profit. 
Men  thought  he  talked  too  freely;  "more  than 
was  wise  and  proper,"21  was  the  opinion  of  the 
judicious  Villard.  At  the  beginning  of  the  war 
Halleck  gave  his  subordinate  a  kind  and  helpful 
caution,  warning  him  that  his  use  of  his  tongue 
was,  to  say  the  least,  indiscreet.22  What  is  most 
charming  is  Sherman's  way  of  receiving  such  good 
counsel.  He  knows  the  danger.  He  will  do  all  he 
can  to  avoid  it.  "We  as  soldiers  best  fulfill  our 
parts  by  minding  our  own  business,  and  I  will  try 
to  do  that." 23  "  I  will  try  and  hold  my  tongue  and 
pen  and  give  my  undivided  thoughts  and  atten- 
tion to  the  military  duties  devolving  on  me." 24 

He  might  as  well  have  tried  to  dam  his  beloved 
Mississippi.  Listen  to  the  comment  of  one  excel- 
lent observer  on  the  general's  conversational  pro- 


142  UNION  PORTRAITS 

clivities:  "He  must  talk,  quick,  sharp,  and  yet  not 
harshly,  all  the  time  making  his  odd  gestures, 
which,  no  less  than  the  intonation  of  his  voice, 
serve  to  emphasize  his  language.  He  cannot  bear 
a  clog  upon  his  thoughts  nor  an  interruption  to 
his  language.  He  admits  of  no  opposition.  He 
overrides  everything.  He  never  hesitates  at  in- 
terrupting any  one,  but  cannot  bear  to  be  inter- 
rupted himself." 25 

The  most  striking  instance  of  Sherman's  talk- 
ing and  writing  tendency  to  digress  into  politics 
was  his  agreement  with  Johnston  upon  terms  of 
peace  at  the  time  of  the  latter's  surrender.  In 
his  zeal  to  carry  out  his  ideas  of  the  public  good, 
the  Union  commander  certainly  exceeded  the  or- 
dinary limits  of  military  negotiation.  It  is  equally 
true  that  Stanton  and  Halleck  were  unnecessarily 
rough  and  discourteous  in  disapproving  his  ar- 
rangements. Nevertheless,  their  ill-judged  harsh- 
ness did  not  justify  Sherman's  violent  outburst 
to  his  own  subordinate,  Logan:  "If  such  be  the 
welcome  the  East  gives  to  the  West,  we  can  but  let 
them  make  war  and  fight  it  out  themselves."26 

in 

What  I  have  written  so  far  must  not  be  held  to 
imply  that  Sherman  was  a  dreamer,  a  mere  vi- 
sionary, who  lived  in  the  clouds.  His  whole  career 
and  his  immense  accomplishment  would  make  such 
a  suggestion  absurd.  Rich  and  eager  as  his  imagi- 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         143 

nation  was,  it  was  always  subject  to  the  closest 
bonds  of  logic  and  reasoning.  It  was  this  that  made 
his  conclusions  not  only  abundant,  but  positive. 
"My  opinions  are  usually  very  positive/'  he 
writes,  "and  there  is  no  reason  why  you  should  not 
know  them/'27  To  him,  at  any  rate,  they  ap- 
peared to  be  based  upon  arguments  which  he  had 
examined  and  found  irrefragable. 

It  is  curious  that  some  who  knew  him  well  have 
denied  that  he  was  a  reasoner.  His  subordinate 
in  Louisiana,  Professor  Boyd,  declared  that  he 
leaped  to  results  by  intuition,  that  he  could  not 
give  reasons,  and  that  his  letters  contained  not 
reasons,  but  conclusions.28  This  seems  to  me  a 
misapprehension.  It  was  not  that  he  could  not 
give  reasons,  but  that  he  would  not.  He  was  a 
soldier,  a  man  of  action.  He  could  not  stop  to 
make  plain  his  mental  processes  to  a  bungler  like 
you  or  me.  Paper  would  not  suffice  to  hold  his 
conclusions.  How  then  should  he  bother  with  ex- 
plaining the  long  and  devious  paths  by  which  he 
came  to  them?  His  own  view  of  his  logical  activity 
is  delightful.  "I  am  too  fast,  but  there  are  prin- 
ciples of  government  as  sure  to  result  from  war  as 
in  law,  religion,  or  any  moral  science.  Some  pre- 
fer to  jump  to  the  conclusion  by  reason.  Others 
prefer  to  follow  developments  by  the  slower  and 
surer  road  of  experience/' 29  Even  more  delightful 
is  his  adjustment  of  the  whole  matter  to  the  some- 
what academic  level  of  Professor  Boyd:  "Never 


144  UNION  PORTRAITS 

give  reasons  for  what  you  think  or  do  until  you 
must.  Maybe,  after  a  while,  a  better  reason  will 
pop  into  your  head/'  30 

This  blending  of  iron  logic  with  vivid  imagina- 
tion is  most  characteristic  of  Sherman  always.  His 
imagination  made  him  wonderfully,  charmingly 
tolerant,  up  to  a  certain  point,  of  the  views  of 
others,  and  even,  where  he  had  not  concluded 
positively,  distrustful  of  his  own.  He  begs  to  be 
checked,  if  inclined  to  exceed  proper  authority.31 
With  winning  self-criticism  he  assures  Grant  that 
"Rosecrans  and  Burnside  and  Sherman  .  .  .  would 
be  ashamed  of  petty  quarrels  if  you  were  behind 
and  near  them/' 32  And  what  an  admirable  piece  of 
analysis  is  his  comparison  of  himself  with  Grant 
and  McClernand.  McClernand,  he  says,  sees  well 
what  is  near,  but  very  little  beyond.  "My  style 
is  the  reverse.  I  am  somewhat  blind  to  what  oc- 
curs near  me,  but  have  a  clear  perception  of  things 
and  events  remote.  Grant  possesses  the  happy 
medium  and  it  is  for  this  reason  I  admire  him/' 33 

But  if  Sherman  was  broad-minded  and  gently 
tolerant  up  to  a  certain  point,  beyond  that  he 
ceased  to  be  so,  and  then  his  energetic  logic  made 
him  refuse  all  compromise.  He  was,  if  I  may  use 
the  phrase,  fiercely  reasonable.  Just  because  he 
saw  so  far  and  saw  so  clearly,  it  seemed  to  him 
that  there  could  be  nothing  worth  considering  be- 
yond the  limits  of  his  vision.  To  serve  under  him, 
when  you  shared  his  views,  or  trusted  him  wholly, 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         145 

must  have  been  a  joy;  but  it  was  surely  purgatory, 
when  you  disliked  him  and  he  disliked  you.  If  he 
was  once  convinced  that  you  were  in  the  wrong, 
nothing  too  savage  could  be  done  to  set  you  in- 
tellectually right  for  your  own  good.  In  other 
words,  as  an  officer  of  the  Inquisition,  he  would 
have  been  unsurpassed  in  ingenuity  and  in  severity. 

Probably  the  most  amusing  as  well  as  the  most 
instructive  of  his  intolerances  was  his  animosity 
toward  newspaper  men.  No  working  general  on 
either  side  enjoyed  them  or  permitted  them  more 
freedom  than  policy  absolutely  required.  But 
Sherman  detested  them.  It  has  been  shrewdly 
pointed  out  that  he  was  too  much  like  them  to 
love  them  and  that  as  a  war  correspondent  he  could 
probably  have  earned  a  much  larger  salary  than  as 
a  general.  It  has  been  suggested,  also,  that  his  pro- 
fessed hatred  of  publicity  arose  from  a  desire  to 
supply  his  own,  which  he  was  royally  able  to  do. 

Be  this  as  it  may,  the  general  is  never  more  enter- 
taining than  when  speaking  his  mind  about  the 
press.  Sometimes  he  lashes  it  with  sarcasm,  "We 
have  picked  up  the  barges,  and  will  save  some  pro- 
visions, but  none  of  the  reporters  'floated.'  They 
were  so  deeply  laden  with  weighty  matter  that 
they  must  have  sunk.  In  the  language  of  our 
Dutch  captain,  'What  a  pity  for  religion  is  this 
war!'  but  in  our  affliction  we  can  console  ourselves 
with  the  pious  reflection  that  there  are  plenty  more 
left  of  the  same  sort."  34  Sometimes  he  lectures 


146  UNION  PORTRAITS 

it  paternally  and  endeavors  to  put  these  children 
of  the  Evil  One  into  the  right  way.  "Now  I  am 
again  in  authority  over  you,  and  you  must  heed 
my  advice.  Freedom  of  speech  and  freedom  of  the 
press,  precious  relics  of  former  history,  must  not 
be  construed  too  largely.  You  must  print  noth- 
ing that  prejudices  government  or  excites  envy, 
hatred,  and  malice  in  a  community.  Persons  in 
office  or  out  of  office  must  not  be  flattered  or 
abused."  35  Is  not  every  word  of  that  delicious? 
And  for  misbehavior  he  would  in  all  cases  exact 
the  severest  penalty.  "Even  in  peaceful  times  I 
would  make  every  publisher  liable  in  money  for 
the  truth  of  everything  he  prints."  36  Oh,  stern 
idealist,  — 

"Hereafter  in  a  better  world  than  this 
I  shall  desire  more  love  and  knowledge  of  you." 

As  newspapers  represented  free  speech,  and  as 
free  speech  is  inseparably  bound  up  with  democ- 
racy, Sherman's  mistrust  of  popular  government 
grew  all  through  the  war.  Personally  he  was  the 
most  democratic  of  men.  Also,  he  was  convinced 
that  one  political  organization  must  prevail  over 
the  whole  United  States.  But  as  to  the  final  char- 
acter of  that  organization  he  was  somewhat 
doubtful.  "This  country  must  be  united  by  the 
silken  bonds  of  a  generous  and  kindly  Union  if 
possible,  or  by  the  harsh  steel  bands  of  a  despot 
otherwise.  Of  course,  we  all  prefer  the  former."  8T 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         147 

Of  course  he  did  prefer  it.  Still,  the  editors  some- 
times tried  his  patience.  Once,  when  it  was  over- 
tried,  he  wrote,  "The  rapid  popular  change 
almost  makes  me  monarchist,  and  raises  the  ques- 
tion whether  the  self-interest  of  one  man  is  not  a 
safer  criterion  than  the  wild  opinions  of  ignorant 
men."  38 

The  nice  combination  of  restless  fancy  with 
vigorous  logic  which  we  have  been  analyzing 
probably  reached  its  climax  in  Sherman's  career 
with  the  celebrated  and  dramatic  march  from 
Atlanta  to  the  seaboard.  Hardly  any  other  gen- 
eral, North  or  South,  would  have  conceived  any- 
thing so  unusual.  Sober  critics,  at  the  time  and 
since,  have  condemned  it  from  the  purely  military 
point  of  view.  If  justifiable,  its  justification  must 
be  found  in  those  larger  political  arguments  which 
delighted  its  contriver.  It  was  forged  almost  as 
a  dream  in  that  eager  and  fertile  workshop  from 
which  dreams  came  so  thickly.  But  the  point  is 
that,  conceived  as  a  dream,  it  was  worked  out  with 
exactly  reasoned  care,  so  that  in  the  end  success 
attended  almost  every  step  of  it.  It  was  no  dream 
to  lead  a  hundred  thousand  men  two  hundred  miles 
through  a  hostile  country  and  bring  them  out  in 
perfect  fighting  trim  and  with  a  confidence  in  their 
commander  which  had  grown  at  every  step  they 
took. 

So  we  see  that,  for  all  his  visions  and  all  his 
theories,  Sherman  was  an  intensely  practical  man. 


148  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Dreams  to  him  were  simply  rich  possibilities  of 
fact.  Except  as  they  could  be  realized,  he  took  no 
interest  in  them.  And  he  devoted  himself  to  realiz- 
ing them  with  all  the  energy  of  his  nature.  "I 
must  have  facts,  knocks,  and  must  go  on/' 39 

Everybody  recognizes  that  he  studied  his  troops 
closely,  kept  careful  count  of  just  what  men  he 
had  and  what  sort  of  men,  and  the  same  for  the 
enemy.  It  is  remarkable  that  when  so  many  gen- 
erals allowed  their  imaginations  to  run  away  with 
them  in  overestimating  the  number  opposed, 
Sherman  more  often  calculated  under  than  over. 

Again,  he  was  notable  as  a  provider.  He  fig- 
ured his  needs  carefully  and  made  everything 
yield  to  them.  Tracks  must  be  kept  clear,  trains 
must  be  kept  running,  noncombatants  must  be 
disregarded,  even  though  high  authority  appealed 
for  them.  No  difficulties  were  recognized  and  no 
excuses  would  serve.  To  a  hesitating  quarter- 
master the  curt  answer  was:  "If  you  don't  have 
my  army  supplied,  and  keep  it  supplied,  we'll  eat 
your  mules  up,  sir,  —  eat  your  mules  up."  40 

In  other  matters  of  organization  Sherman  had 
the  same  instinct  for  system  and  disliked  what 
interfered  with  it.  He  objected,  as  Thomas  did, 
to  the  intrusion  of  even  philanthropy  into  the 
sphere  of  his  command.  "  The  Sanitary  and  Chris- 
tian Commissions  are  enough  to  eradicate  all 
traces  of  Christianity  out  of  our  minds."  41  Yet, 
while  he  exacted  absolute  subordination  from 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         149 

others,  he  was  ready  and  eager  to  obey  the  orders 
of  his  superiors,  even  though  he  might  not  approve 
of  them. 

There  is  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  minute- 
ness with  which  he  planned  for  possible  contin- 
gencies. Schofield  thinks  that  in  this  regard  he 
was  neglectful  of  detail.42  Possibly.  But  the  activ- 
ity of  his  imagination  led  him  to  consider  and  re- 
consider all  the  essentials  of  accident.  And  it 
was  rare  that  either  circumstances  or  the  enemy 
confronted  him  with  a  situation  which  he  had  not 
already  taken  into  account,  in  most  cases  with 
adequate  precaution. 

The  greatest  test  of  a  general's  practical  ability 
is  as  to  his  skill  in  handling  men.  Perhaps  others 
surpassed  Sherman  in  this,  but,  considering  his 
temperament,  his  success  was  wonderful.  His 
greatest  lack  was  patience.  When  things  did  not 
suit  him,  he  could  be  very  disagreeable,  as  with 
Hooker.  On  the  other  hand,  he  had  three  admir- 
able qualities,  which  go  farther  than  any  others  in 
dealing  with  one's  fellows,  sympathy,  simplicity, 
sincerity.  He  could  understand  a  man's  difficulties. 
He  could  step  right  down  from  his  dignity  and 
take  hold  of  them.  He  had  no  hesitation  in  telling 
you  what  he  thought  and  you  knew  it  was  exactly 
what  he  did  think. 

With  his  equals  and  superiors  this  frankness  is 
especially  fine.  How  genuine,  how  free  from  offense 
because  of  their  genuineness,  and  how  helpful,  are 


150  UNION  PORTRAITS 

his  letters  of  advice  and  caution  to  Grant,  who  was 
large  enough  to  take  them  as  they  were  meant  and 
profit  by  them.  Those  addressed  to  Buell  are  no 
less  creditable,  though  probably  not  received  in 
quite  the  same  spirit. 

With  his  own  subordinates  Sherman's  human 
qualities  were  even  more  effective.  The  soldiers 
delighted  in  "the  old  man's"  brusqueness  and 
oddities.  "Uncle  Billy"  was  a  quaint  figure  such 
as  simple  minds  love  to  mock  at  and  tell  tales  of. 
It  is  alleged  that  strict  discipline  was  not  always 
observed  in  Sherman's  armies.  If  so,  it  is  because 
the  commander  cared  nothing  for  parade  troops. 
He  was  too  busy  with  what  was  essential  to  bother 
with  what  was  not.  But  if  discipline  means  in- 
stant readiness  to  go  when  and  where  ordered, 
Sherman's  men  were  disciplined  enough.  They 
had  confidence  in  their  chief.  Even  when  he 
seemed  to  be  leading  them  out  into  the  darkness, 
away  from  all  support  and  all  communication,  they 
never  hesitated  to  follow.  He  said  everything 
would  be  right,  and  they  knew  it  would.  What  is 
more,  they  loved  him.  In  spite  of  his  wrinkled  face 
and  his  harsh  speech  and  his  uncouth  ways,  they 
loved  him,  because  they  knew  he  was  honest  and 
fearless  and  thought  more  about  them  than  he  did 
about  himself. 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         151 

IV 

Through  all  this  discussion,  it  will  have  been 
perfectly  evident  what  I  meant  by  calling  Sherman 
typically  American.  Though  by  profession  and 
habit  a  soldier,  in  his  union  of  the  theoretical  and 
practical  he  was  essentially  the  man  of  business 
who  is  to-day  everywhere  the  most  prominent  and 
characteristic  American  figure.  Let  us  see  how 
thoroughly  the  business  quality  entered  into  the 
various  aspects  of  Sherman's  career. 

To  begin  with,  he  was  a  vast  and  tireless  worker. 
"His  industry  was  prodigious/'  says  Grant.  "He 
worked  all  the  time,  and  with  an  enthusiasm,  a 
patience,  and  a  good  humor  that  gave  him  great 
power  with  his  army."  **  He  was  no  shirk,  no  man 
to  throw  on  to  others  anything  that  he  could  do 
himself.  On  the  contrary,  if  others  failed  him,  he 
would  do  double.  "They  have  not  sent  us  a  single 
regular  officer  from  Washington,  and  so  engrossed 
are  they  with  Missouri  that  they  don't  do  us 
justice.  The  more  necessity  for  us  to  strain  every 
nerve."  ** 

Again,  fighting  with  him  was  rather  a  business 
than  a  pleasure.  His  personal  courage  was,  of 
course,  beyond  question.  But  some  have  ques- 
tioned whether,  as  a  consequence  of  his  imagina- 
tive and  sensitive  temperament,  he  was  not  rather 
less  clear-headed  and  capable  under  the  pressure 
of  combat  than  when  planning  a  battle  or  a  cam- 


UNION  PORTRAITS 

paign.  General  Howard  asserts  that  "his  intense 
suggestive  faculties  seemed  often  to  be  impaired 
by  the  actual  conflict/' 45  On  the  other  hand,  Cox 
and  Schofield  both  testify  that  where  others  grew 
excited  Sherman  grew  cool,  and  that  in  the  pres- 
ence of  immediate  danger  he  dropped  theoretical 
discussion  and  settled  all  difficulties  with  peremp- 
tory sternness.  "  On  the  battlefield  where  he  com- 
mands Sherman's  nervous  manner  is  toned  down. 
He  grates  his  teeth,  and  his  lips  are  closed  more 
firmly,  giving  an  expression  of  greater  determina- 
tion to  his  countenance/' 46 

In  any  case,  although  he  calls  being  at  the  head 
of  a  strong  column  of  troops,  in  the  execution  of 
some  task  that  requires  brain,  the  highest  pleasure 
of  war,47  yet  it  is  evident  that  to  him  fighting  was 
chiefly  a  means  to  an  end,  in  other  words,  a  matter 
of  business,  to  be  carried  on  calmly,  carefully,  and 
intelligently  as  such.  "Neither  of  us,"  he  says  of 
Grant  and  himself,  "by  nature  was  a  combative 
man/'48  In  the  same  spirit,  though  infinitely 
careful  of  his  troops,  he  viewed  slaughter  with  in- 
difference when  the  necessities  of  business  re- 
quired it.  "Tell  Morgan,"  he  said,  "that  we  will 
lose  four  thousand  men  before  we  take  Vicks- 
burg,  and  we  may  as  well  lose  them  here  as  any- 
where else." 49 

The  same  businesslike  tone  appears  in  Sher- 
man's attitude  toward  ambition  and  glory.  Like 
every  man  who  does  things,  he  wished  posterity 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN          153 

to  speak  well  of  him,  to  speak  highly  of  him,  and 
he  would  ha^e  been  the  last  to  deny  this  wish. 
But  he  was  singularly  free  from  the  petty  vanities 
of  show  and  adulation  which  disfigure  the  biogra- 
phy of  so  many  generals.  As  he  rather  affected 
a  shabby  appearance,  so  he  rather  affected  an 
avoidance  of  newspaper  notoriety.  "I  never  see 
my  name  in  print  without  a  feeling  of  contamina- 
tion, and  I  will  undertake  to  forego  half  of  my 
salary  if  the  newspapers  will  ignore  my  name." 50 
Even  as  regards  more  substantial  recognition,  he 
was  somewhat  reluctant,  not  from  undue  modesty, 
for  no  one  ever  better  gauged  his  own  achievements, 
but  because  he  feared  that  sudden  exaltation 
meant  a  sudden  fall.  Early  in  his  career  he  ex- 
pressed his  wish  to  remain  in  the  background,  and 
when  promotion  came,  his  first  feeling  was  that 
he  had  not  yet  deserved  it.  Few  men  on  the  road 
to  distinction  have  expressed  themselves  more 
sensibly  than  he  does  in  his  admirable  letter  of 
advice  to  Buell:  "To  us,  with  an  angry,  embit- 
tered enemy  in  front  and  all  around  us,  it  looks 
childish,  foolish  —  yea,  criminal  —  for  sensible 
men  to  be  away  off  to  the  rear,  sitting  in  security, 
torturing  their  brains  and  writing  on  reams  of 
foolscap  to  fill  a  gap  which  the  future  historian 
will  dispose  of  by  a  very  short,  and  maybe,  an 
unimportant,  chapter,  or  even  paragraph.  .  .  . 
Like  in  a  race,  the  end  is  all  that  is  remembered 
by  the  great  world." 51 


154  UNION  PORTRAITS 

It  is  in  this  purely  business  instinct,  the  com- 
bining of  theory  with  practice  for  a  business  pur- 
pose, that  we  must  seek  the  explanation  of  the 
most  curious  problem  in  Sherman's  career,  his 
harsh  treatment  of  the  invaded  enemy.  No  man 
was  by  nature  less  cruel  than  he.  No  general  ex- 
presses himself  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  war  more 
decidedly  against  plundering  and  vandalism.  He 
urges  upon  his  subordinates  consideration  for  non- 
combatants:  "War  at  best  is  barbarism,  but  to 
involve  all  —  children,  women,  old  and  helpless 
—  is  more  than  can  be  justified." 52  He  deplores 
the  lack  of  discipline  which  makes  possible  the 
excesses  of  the  soldiers.  "[I]  am  free  to  admit  we 
all  deserve  to  be  killed  unless  we  can  produce  a 
state  of  discipline  when  such  disgraceful  acts 
cannot  be  committed  unpunished/' 53  He  is  even 
almost  ready  to  resign  his  position,  he  feels  the  dis- 
grace so  keenly.  "The  amount  of  burning,  steal- 
ing, and  plundering  done  by  our  army  makes  me 
ashamed  of  it.  I  would  quit  the  service  if  I  could, 
because  I  feel  that  we  are  drifting  to  the  worst 
sort  of  vandalism."  M 

Then  he  has  an  army  of  his  own,  marches  straight 
into  the  South,  and  leaves  a  trail  behind  which 
makes  him  not  only  execrated  by  his  enemies,  but 
typical  in  modern  warfare  for  destruction  and 
plunder.*  And  all  just  as  a  sheer  matter  of  busi- 

*  I  leave  this  as  it  was  written  in  the  spring  of  1914. 
Events  since  then  have  made  the  vandalism  of  Sherman 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         155 

ness.  The  war  must  be  ended  and  the  way  to  end 
it  was  not  merely  to  defeat  armies  in  the  field,  but 
to  bring  desolation  and  misery  to  the  humblest 
homes  of  the  Confederacy.  He  may  not  have  said 
"War  is  hell,"  but  assuredly  he  acted  it.  He  may 
not  have  burned  Columbia,  but  he  did  write,  of- 
ficially, "[I]  should  not  hesitate  to  burn  Savannah, 
Charleston*  and  Wilmington,  or  either  of  them  if 
the  garrisons  were  needed/'55  And  he  summed 
up  the  whole  bare  naked  theory  in  one  tremendous 
passage,  as  characteristic  of  the  man  as  of  the 
methods  he  employed:  "Of  necessity,  in  war  the 
commander  on  the  spot  is  the  judge,  and  may 
take  your  house,  your  fields,  your  everything,  and 
turn  you  all  out,  helpless,  to  starve.  It  may  be 
wrong,  but  that  don't  alter  the  case.  In  war  you 
can't  help  yourselves,  and  the  only  possible  remedy 
is  to  stop  war.  .  .  .  Our  duty  is  not  to  build  up;  it 
is  rather  to  destroy  both  the  rebel  army  and  what- 
ever of  wealth  or  property  it  has  founded  its 
boasted  strength  upon." 56 

As  an  admirable  concrete  illustration  of  this 
thoroughly  businesslike  frame  of  mind,  take  the 
following  little  touch.  At  the  bottom  of  a  page 

seem  like  discipline  and  order.  The  injury  done  by  him 
seldom  directly  affected  anything  but  property.  There  was 
no  systematic  cruelty  in  the  treatment  of  noncombatants, 
and  to  the  eternal  glory  of  American  soldiers  be  it  recorded 
that  insult  and  abuse  toward  women  were  practically 
unknown  during  the  Civil  War. 


156  UNION  PORTRAITS 

of  the  "Memoirs"  we  read  the  solemn  injunction, 
with  regard  to  soldiers  killed  in  battle,  "There 
should  be  no  real  neglect  of  the  dead/'  Turn  the 
page  and  we  find  out  why;  "because  it  has  a  bad 
effect  on  the  living." 57 

v 

In  enlarging  on  this  fiercely  practical  element  in 
Sherman  I  have  not  meant  to  give  the  impression 
that  he  was  a  mere  machine  man,  without  nerves 
or  emotions.  Quite  the  contrary  was  the  case.  He 
was  all  nerves,  at  least  on  the  surface;  for  I  have 
a  shrewd  suspicion  that,  as  with  so  many  Ameri- 
cans, the  dance  of  the  muscles  at  once  expressed 
and  relieved  the  inward  restlessness.  To  every 
emotional  stimulus  he  responded  with  extraor- 
dinary vivacity.  A  fair  day  almost  distracts  him 
from  the  rush  of  battle,  and  in  a  formal  report  he 
writes,  "The  scene  was  enchanting;  too  beautiful 
to  be  disturbed  by  the  harsh  clamor  of  war;  but 
the  Chattahoochee  lay  beyond,  and  I  had  to  reach 
it."  58  On  the  other  hand,  when  the  news  of  South 
Carolina's  secession  came  to  him  in  New  Orleans, 
it  moved  him  to  tears.59 

Also,  he  was  irritable,  as  every  one  admits,  had 
sharp  outbursts  of  temper  when  things  went  wrong. 
This  appeared  in  many  little  matters  as  well  as 
in  the  great  historic  scene  when  he  showed  his 
bitter,  if  justifiable,  wrath  against  Stanton  by  re- 
fusing to  take  his  hand  before  the  eyes  of  the 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         157 

country  and  of  the  whole  world.  As  with  his 
other  faults,  Sherman  was  quick  to  recognize  this, 
illustrating  Grant's  excellent  comment  on  him, 
"Sherman  is  impetuous  and  faulty,  but  he  sees 
his  faults  as  soon  as  any  man/' 60  Speaking  once 
of  his  companion  in  arms,  McPherson,  the  general 
said,  "  He  is  as  good  an  officer  as  I  am — is  younger, 
and  has  a  better  temper/'61 

Again,  as  Sherman  was  irritable,  so  he  was  sus- 
ceptible of  depression  and  discouragement.  The 
term  "  melancholy/'  so  applicable  to  Lincoln,  has 
no  significance  here.  Sherman's  downheartedness 
is  far  better  expressed  by  the  very  American  word 
for  a  very  American  thing,  "disgusted."  His  low 
spirits  had  always  a  perfectly  tangible  cause  and 
a  moment's  change  in  external  circumstances 
could  remove  them.  But  while  they  lasted,  they 
were  very  low  indeed,  and  his  expressive  organiza- 
tion made  them  widely  manifest.  Read  Villard's 
account  of  the  behavior  which  led  to  the  popular 
belief  that  the  general  was  insane.  His  fear  as  to 
the  future  of  the  Union,  says  Villard,  was  so  great 
that  it  clung  to  him  day  and  night,  like  an  obses- 
sion. "He  lived  in  the  Gait  House,  occupying 
rooms  on  the  ground  floor.  He  paced  by  the  houic 
up  and  down  the  corridor  leading  to  them,  smok- 
ing and  obviously  absorbed  in  oppressive  thoughts. 
He  did  this  to  such  an  extent  that  it  was  generally 
noticed  and  remarked  upon  by  the  guests  and 
employees  of  the  hotel.  His  strange  ways  led  to 


158  UNION  PORTRAITS 

gossip,  and  it  was  soon  whispered  about  that  he 
was  suffering  from  mental  depression/'  62 

For  the  internal  view  of  these  moods  take  a  pas- 
sage from  Sherman's  own  letters,  on  a  little  dif- 
ferent occasion:  "My  feelings  prompted  me  to 
forbear  and  the  consequence  is  my  family  and 
friends  are  almost  cold  to  me,  and  they  feel  and 
say  that  I  have  failed  at  the  critical  moment  of  my 
life.  It  may  be  I  am  but  a  chip  on  the  whirling 
tide  of  time  destined  to  be  cast  on  the  shore  as  a 
worthless  weed."  63 

Then  would  come  the  rebound,  and  natural 
vivacity  and  gayety  would  amply  justify  the  re- 
mark of  one  who  knew  him  well,  that,  "Of  a  happy 
nature  himself,  he  strove  to  make  all  around  him 
happy."  64  For  laughter  as  a  leisurely  amusement 
of  life  Sherman  had  too  little  time.  The  wrinkles 
of  that  expression  were  crossed  and  crowded  out 
by  wrinkles  of  care  and  passionate  endeavor.  But 
he  had  in  a  high  degree  the  American  gift  of  shrewd, 
witty  words  that  either  tickle  or  sting.  How  apt 
is  his  description  of  Beauregard,  "bursting  with 
French  despair."  How  merry  is  his  account  of  a 
lawsuit  he  would  wish  to  have  conducted :  "  I  would 
give  one  hundred  dollars  to  be  free  to  take  Levy's 
case  —  put  St.  Ange  on  the  stand  and  make  him 
describe  his  drive  to  Judge  Boyce's  and  back  — 
he  first  described  the  journey  as  enough  to  kill  any 
horse,  but  now  that  his  horse  is  lame  he  insists  it 
was  a  sweet  ride  and  not  enough  to  hurt  a  colt. 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN          159 

There  is  plenty  of  fun  in  the  cause."  65  How  apt 
and  merry  both  is  his  recommendation  of  some 
negro  troops  to  McPherson.  Mark  Twain  might 
have  written  it:  "There  are  about  100  negroes 
fit  for  service  enrolled  under  the  command  of 
the  venerable  George  Washington,  who,  mounted 
on  a  sprained  horse,  with  his  hat  plumed  with 
the  ostrich  feather,  his  full  belly  girt  with  a  stout 
belt,  from  which  hangs  a  terrible  cleaver,  and 
followed  by  his  trusty  orderly  on  foot,  makes  an 
army  on  your  flank,  that  ought  to  give  you  every 
assurance  of  safety  from  that  exposed  quarter."  66 

The  nerves  which  were  so  susceptible  to  comedy 
were  also  responsive  to  the  pathos  of  life.  Very 
little  acquaintance  with  Sherman  is  needed  to 
learn  that  his  imagination  made  him  quickly  aware 
of  the  sufferings  of  others,  and  his  energy  hastened 
to  relieve  them.  This  is  evident  at  all  stages  of  his 
career,  whether  he  was  visiting  the  bedside  of  a 
sick  cadet  in  his  Southern  college,  or  interfering 
to  protect  a  poor  widow  from  the  misery  his  ab- 
stract theories  of  destruction  had  brought  upon 
her.  "The  poor  woman  is  distracted  and  cannot 
rest.  She  will  soon  be  as  prostrate  as  her  dying 
daughter.  Either  the  army  must  move  or  she."  67 

And  though  neither  fantastic  nor  morbid,  Sher- 
man was  also  sensitive  in  his  conscientiousness. 
Where  he  thought  he  had  done  injustice,  he  would 
not  rest  till  he  had  made  it  right.  However  his 
eager  fancy  might  lead  him  into  misstatements, 


160  UNION  PORTRAITS 

no  man  was  more  scrupulous  about  telling  the 
truth  as  he  knew  it.  Above  all,  he  was  rigidly  in- 
sistent on  financial  honesty.  In  commercial  as 
well  as  in  military  pursuits,  he  would  tolerate  no 
transaction  which  had  the  slightest  taint.  Even 
so  trivial  a  matter  as  sending  home  insignificant 
souvenirs  troubled  him.  "I  could  collect  plenty  of 
trophies  but  have  always  refrained  and  think  it 
best  I  should.  Others  do  collect  trophies  and  send 
home,  but  I  prefer  not  to  do  it."  68 

Upon  what  foundation  of  religion  this  strict 
morality  was  based  is  a  curious  study.  Consider- 
ing his  freedom  of  expression  in  other  respects, 
Sherman  is  singularly  sparing  of  religious  refer- 
ences in  his  published  letters.  If  he  was  at  all 
lacking  in  positive  beliefs,  such  uncertainty  was 
at  any  rate  not  of  the  rather  abject  type  so  ex- 
quisitely mocked  by  Voltaire  in  his  story  of  the 
Swiss  captain  who  withdrew  into  a  thicket  before 
battle  and  prayed,  "0  my  God,  if  there  is  a  God, 
please  save  my  soul,  if  I  have  a  soul."  It  is  prob- 
able, however,  from  occasional  allusions  to  the 
matter,  that  Sherman  cherished  some  broad  religi- 
ous beliefs  rather  positively,  but  that  his  essential 
effort  was  to  forward  the  cause  of  good  in  the  world 
and  to  love  his  fellow  men.  In  other  words,  here 
again  his  religion  was  that  of  millions  of  honest, 
earnest,  hard-working  Americans,  that  is,  a  religion 
made  up,  in  about  equal  parts,  of  reverence  and 
indifference,  and  perhaps  well  expressed  in  the 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN          161 

phrase  of  one  of  them,  "I  am  doing  my  work,  let 
God  do  his." 

It  seems  appropriate  here  to  emphasize  the 
defects,  or  shall  we  say  the  limitations,  of  this 
vital,  intricate,  most  fascinating  character,  though 
these  limitations  are  hard  to  seize  and  still  harder 
to  define.  ^ 

To  begin  with,  you  feel  a  little  excess  of  purpose 
in  his  life.  Purpose  is  a  splendid  thing,  a  thor- 
oughly American  thing,  it  moves  the  world  like 
the  lever  of  Archimedes.  But  purpose  for  break- 
fast, luncheon,  and  dinner  does  grow  wearisome. 
A  day  of  mere  quiet  is  good  for  every  one.  I  do  not 
believe  Sherman  ever  had  an  hour.  To  live  with 
him  must  have  been  like  living  with  a  bumblebee. 

Then  I  feel  that  Sherman  had  not  depth  quite 
in  proportion  to  his  splendid  breadth  and  variety. 
There  were  elements  in  life  he  never  touched.  The 
most  striking  illustration  of  this  is  in  his  letters. 
I  read  his  official  correspondence  and  I  was  as- 
tonished at  the  freedom  and  ease  with  which  the 
man  poured  forth  his  thoughts  and  feelings  on 
matters  that  others  were  inclined  to  treat  merely 
formally.  I  said  to  myself,  what  a  treasure  of  self- 
revelation  in  things  of  the  soul  his  personal  letters 
will  be.  Well,  when  I  turned  to  the  personal  let- 
ters, they  added  little  or  nothing  to  the  official. 
To  his  brother  and  his  wife  he  writes  exactly  as  to 
a  subordinate,  or  an  editor.  He  says  all  he  has  to 
say  to  everybody  and  anybody.  It  will  be  urged 


162  UNION  PORTRAITS 

that  only  those  portions  of  his  private  correspond- 
ence which  bear  on  public  interests  have  been 
published.  But  that  is  not  the  point.  It  is  what 
he  does  write  that  counts,  not  what  he  does  not. 
His  letters  to  the  girl  he  loves  would  make  excel- 
lent weekly  correspondence  for  a  newspaper.  Take 
a  curious  instance.  He  begins  an  affectionate  letter 
to  his  daughter.  Before  he  has  written  a  page,  he 
drifts  into  political  discussion  and  concludes  that 
he  is  writing  to  the  mother,  not  to  the  daughter  at 
all. 

Another  odd  case  of  this  living  for  publicity, 
all  on  the  outside,  is  Sherman's  insertion  in  his 
"  Memoirs "  of  the  letter  referring  to  the  death  of 
his  son,  Willie.  The  paper  in  itself  is  touching. 
The  father's  affection  for  his  son,  as  for  all  his 
family,  is  evidently  strong  and  true.  But  the  in- 
troduction of  such  a  letter  in  such  a  way  would 
have  been  utterly  impossible  for  a  nature  like 
that  of  Thomas. 

And  since  I  have  mentioned  Thomas,  let  me 
refer  to  another  matter  which  will  help  to  make 
plain  the  subtle  point  I  am  elucidating.  To  both 
Thomas  and  Lee  grateful  fellow  citizens  made  the 
offer  of  a  house  purchased  by  public  subscription. 
Both  Thomas  and  Lee  refused,  requesting  that 
the  money  might  be  given  to  poor  and  suffering 
soldiers.  A  similar  offer  was  suggested  to  Sher- 
man. Though  unwilling  to  take  anything  for  him- 
self, he  was  ready  to  accept  it  for  his  family,  pro- 


WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN         163 

vided  it  was  accompanied  with  bonds  sufficient  to 
pay  the  taxes.69  There  was  nothing  in  the  least 
discreditable  about  this,  nothing  even  indelicate. 
Perhaps  the  nicety  of  Thomas  was  overstrained. 
But  the  difference  of  attitude  illustrates  exactly 
what  I  am  attempting  to  indicate. 

May  we  use  the  painter's  phrase,  and  say  that 
Sherman's  character  lacked  atmosphere,  lacked 
that  something  of  depth  and  mystery  which  makes 
the  indescribable,  inexhaustible  charm  of  Lincoln? 
Sherman  seems  like  one  of  our  clear,  blue  January 
days,  with  a  fresh  north  wind.  It  stimulates  you. 
It  inspires  you.  But  crisp,  vivid,  intoxicating  as  it 
is,  it  seems  to  me  that  too  prolonged  enjoyment 
of  such  weather  would  dry  my  soul  till  the  vague 
fragrance  of  immortality  was  all  gone  out  of  it. 

Yet  in  his  defects  as  in  his  excellences  he  was, 
we  may  repeat,  a  typical  American.  Perhaps  I 
cannot  better  emphasize  the  absurdity  of  that 
word  "typical"  than  by  expressing  the  wish  that 
there  were  many  more  Americans  like  him. 


VI 
EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Steubenville,  Ohio,  December  19,  1814. 

Entered  Kenyon  College,  1831. 

Admitted  to  the  bar,  1835. 

Married  Mary  A.  Lamson,  December  31,  1836. 

Wife  died,  March  13,  1844. 

Practiced  law  in  Ohio  till  1847. 

Removed  to  Pittsburg  in  1847. 

Married  Ellen  Hutchinson,  June  25,  1856. 

Government  counsel  in  California,  1857-59. 

Defended  Daniel  E.  Sickles,  1859. 

Entered  Buchanan's  Cabinet,  December  20,  1860. 

Became  Secretary  of  War  under  Lincoln,  January  15,  1862. 

Relinquished  War  Department,  May  26,  1868. 

Appointed  to  Supreme  Court,  December  22,  1869. 

Died,  December  24, 1869. 


VI 

EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON 

I 

THE  problem  with  Stanton  is  to  find  out  how 
one  so  thoroughly  disliked  and  apparently  objec- 
tionable could  get  the  most  important  adminis- 
trative position  in  the  country  and  hold  it  through 
the  greatest  crisis  in  American  history.  This,  too, 
although  he  was  a  man  with  no  political  standing 
and  very  little  executive  experience,  a  clever  prac- 
tical lawyer,  nothing  more.  Yet  he  is  set  to  han- 
dling hundreds  of  thousands  of  men  and  hundreds 
of  millions  of  money,  and  does  it.  How?  Why? 

That  Stanton  was  thoroughly  disliked  had  bet- 
ter be  made  plain  in  the  beginning  by  two  gen- 
eral quotations,  of  great  vigor  and  significance. 
The  first  represents  the  result  of  Mr.  John  T. 
Morse's  wide  study  of  the  man  and  his  surround- 
ings: "Stanton's  abilities  commanded  some  re- 
spect, though  his  character  never  excited  either 
respect  or  liking. ...  In  his  dealings  with  men  he 
was  capable  of  much  duplicity,  yet  in  matters  of 
business  he  was  rigidly  honest. ...  He  was  prompt 
and  decisive  rather  than  judicial  or  correct  in  his 
judgments  concerning  men  and  things;  he  was 
arbitrary,  harsh,  bad-tempered,  and  impulsive; 


168  UNION   PORTRAITS 

he  often  committed  acts  of  injustice  or  cruelty, 
for  which  he  rarely  made  amends  and  still  more 
rarely  seemed  disturbed  by  remorse  or  regret.  .  .  . 
Undoubtedly  Mr.  Lincoln  was  the  only  ruler 
known  to  history  who  could  have  cooperated  for 
years  with  such  a  minister/'  1 

Beside  this  verdict  of  the  historian  let  us  place 
the  contemporary  judgment  of  Gideon  Welles,  re- 
membering, however,  that  the  Secretary  of  the 
Navy  viewed  all  his  colleagues  with  a  sternly  criti- 
cal eye.  After  reading  his  shrewd  but  acrid  pages, 
I  ask  myself  how  Hamilton  and  Jefferson  would 
have  appeared  under  similar  scrutiny. 

But  upon  Stanton  Welles  is  more  severe  than 
upon  any  one  else,  even  Seward,  and  the  following 
comments  are  amplified  again  and  again  in  the 
fifteen  hundred  pages  of  the  " Diary ":  "He  is 
impulsive,  not  administrative;  has  quickness, 
often  rashness,  when  he  has  nothing  to  appre- 
hend; is  more  violent  than  vigorous,  more  demon- 
strative than  discriminating,  more  vain  than 
wise;  is  rude,  arrogant,  and  domineering  towards 
those  in  subordinate  positions  if  they  will  submit 
to  his  rudeness,  but  is  a  sycophant  and  dissembler 
in  deportment  and  language  with  those  whom  he 
fears." 2 

These  general  indictments  are  surely  savage 
enough.  But  we  can  support  them  by  much  other 
testimony  as  to  special  phases.  It  is  generally  con- 
sidered that  the  secretary  had  an  unfortunate 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  169 

habit  of  interfering  in  technical  military  matters; 
and  though  his  enthusiastic  biographer  believes 
him  to  have  been  born  as  great  in  strategy  as  in 
everything  else,  critics  in  general  are  not  of  this 
opinion.  Moreover,  whatever  he  set  out  to  do  he 
persisted  in,  and  he  had  an  incredible  reluctance 
to  admit  that  he  had  made  a  mistake. 

It  is  said,  further,  that,  independent  of  excessive 
confidence  in  his  own  military  judgment,  Stanton 
liked  to  exercise  authority  in  all  things,  big  and 
little.  "  Drunk  with  the  lust  of  power/'  Piatt  calls 
him,3  somewhat  rhetorically,  and  Grant,  in  more 
sober  language,  comments  on  his  natural  disposi- 
tion "  to  assume  all  power  and  control  in  all  mat- 
ters that  he  had  anything  whatever  to  do  with."  4 
Equally  severe  is  the  remark  of  Welles:  "Mr.  Stan- 
ton  was  fond  of  power  and  its  exercise.  It  was 
more  precious  to  him  than  pecuniary  gain  to  domi- 
nate over  his  fellow  men/'  5 

The  passion  for  power  naturally  breeds  jealousy 
of  the  power  of  others  and  animosity  against  those 
who  resist  one's  authority  or  interfere  with  it. 
Seward  told  Bigelow  that  Stanton  was  of  a  jealous 
disposition.6  Elaine  declares  that  the  Secretary, 
with  an  uncontrollable  greed  for  fame,  had  its  nec- 
essary counterpart,  jealousy  and  envy  of  the  in- 
creasing reputation  of  others.7  Mr.  Rhodes  thinks 
that  he  was  "  incapable  of  generosity  to  a  prostrate 
foe."8 

Also,  in  such  a  fiercely  energetic  nature,  jealousy 


170  UNION  PORTRAITS 

and  animosity  could  not  remain  in  the  condition 
of  sentiment,  but  were  bound  to  be  quickly  trans- 
lated into  accordant  action.  Those  who  thwarted 
the  Secretary  in  his  purpose  had  to  suffer,  all  the 
more  because  he  usually  managed  to  identify  his 
personal  antagonists  with  the  enemies  of  his  coun- 
try. "He  used  the  fearful  power  of  the  Govern- 
ment to  crush  those  he  hated,  while  he  sought, 
through  the  same  means,  to  elevate  those  he 
loved,"  says  one  who  knew  him  well.9  Nor  did  he 
hesitate  at  methods,  when  the  object  to  be  at- 
tained was  an  important  one.  Thus,  he  is  said  to 
have  abstracted  bodily  certain  official  records  in 
which  one  of  his  favorites  was  harshly  treated.10 
We  do  not  expect  charges  of  arbitrariness  and 
violence  to  be  combined  with  accusations  of  du- 
plicity. It  happens,  however,  with  this  much- 
abused  man.  There  is  Welles,  of  course,  hacking 
away,  as  usual:  "He  has  cunning  and  skill,  dis- 
sembles his  feelings,  in  short,  is  a  hypocrite,  a 
moral  coward,  while  affecting  to  be,  and  to  a  cer- 
tain extent  being,  brusque,  overvaliant  in  words."11 
But  on  this  point  Welles  has  many  to  support 
him.  It  is  charged  by  some  that  Stanton  entered 
Buchanan's  Cabinet  and  then  betrayed  his  chief 
to  his  Republican  enemies.  The  general  state- 
ment of  McClellan,  that  the  Secretary  would  say 
one  thing  to  a  man's  face  and  just  the  reverse 
behind  his  back,12  may  perhaps  be  attributed  to 
McClellan's  own  state  of  mind.  But  it  is  difficult 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  171 

to  set  aside  entirely  the  general's  account  of 
Stanton's  extreme  enthusiasm  and  even  subser- 
vience in  their  early  acquaintance  as  compared 
with  the  steady  opposition  of  a  little  later  period. 
And  it  is  much  more  difficult  to  set  aside  Stan- 
ton's  explicit  warning  to  McClellan  that  Halleck 
was  probably  the  greatest  scoundrel  and  most 
barefaced  villain  in  America,  while  at  the  very 
same  time  the  Secretary  was  sending  word  to 
Halleck  through  Hitchcock  that  he  had  never  had 
any  other  than  the  highest  respect  for  him  and 
hoped  Halleck  would  not  imagine  that  he  ever 
had.13  In  Stanton's  high-handed  treatment  of 
Sherman  as  to  his  compact  with  Johnston  at  the 
close  of  the  war,  Sherman's  brother,  the  Senator, 
does  not  know  whether  to  read  profound  duplicity 
or,  as  Mr.  Rhodes  does,  a  sudden  impulse  of  violent 
irritation.  "He  manifested  and  assumed  the  in- 
tensest  kindness  for  you,"  John  Sherman  writes, 
"and  certainly  showed  it  to  me.  I  still  think 
that  with  him  it  was  mere  anger  —  the  explosion 
of  a  very  bad  temper."  14 

And,  as  the  accusation  of  duplicity  almost 
necessarily  implies,  Stanton  was  further  charged 
with  truckling  to  those  who  had  power  and  in- 
fluence, just  as  he  bullied  those  who  had  none. 
Welles  declares  that  the  Secretary  of  War  re- 
garded himself  as  the  protege  of  Seward  and  al- 
ways treated  him  with  obsequiousness  and  ser- 
vility, that  he  was  an  adept  at  flattering  and 


172  UNION  PORTRAITS 

wheedling  members  of  Congress  and  pandering 
to  their  whims  and  fancies,  that  he  behaved  to 
Andrew  Johnson  as  fawningly  at  first  as  he  did 
roughly  at  last.  Welles  adds  further  that  he  him- 
self met  Stanton's  browbeating  with  a  determined 
front,  and  from  that  time  on  was  treated  with  a 
deference  shown  to  few  members  of  the  Cabinet. 
Mr.  John  T.  Morse  writes  vividly,  referring  to  the 
Sherman  quarrel:  "Stanton  had  that  peculiar  and 
unusual  form  of  meanness  which  endeavors  to 
force  a  civility  after  an  insult."  15  And  Elaine,  who 
on  other  points  praised  Stanton  highly,  admits 
that  he  had  great  respect  for  men  who  had 
power  and  considered  their  wishes  in  a  way  quite 
unusual  with  him  in  ordinary  cases.16 

It  is  even  asserted  that  the  Secretary's  bullying 
manner  melted  at  once  before  conduct  equally 
aggressive,  and  other  experiences  are  told  similar 
to  that  of  Colonel  Dwight,  who  went  to  get  a 
pass  for  an  old  man  to  visit  his  dying  son.  The 
pass  was  refused,  whereupon  the  colonel  said: 
"  My  name  is  Dwight,  Walton  Dwight,  lieutenant- 
colonel  of  the  One  Hundred  and  Forty-ninth 
Regiment  of  Pennsylvania  volunteers.  You  can 
dismiss  me  from  the  service  as  soon  as  you  like, 
but  I  am  going  to  tell  you  what  I  think  of  you/' 
He  did,  and  got  his  pass.17 

Some  go  so  far  as  to  maintain  that  this  appear- 
ance of  moral  cowardice  was  accompanied  by  a 
decided  lack  of  mere  physical  courage.  Such  a 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  173 

charge  is  pretty  strongly  implied  in  Grant's  accu- 
sation that  Stanton's  timidity  made  him  keep  the 
armies  near  Washington,  that  he  could  see  the 
Union  weakness,  but  not  that  of  the  enemy,  and 
that  the  Confederates  would  have  been  in  no 
danger  if  Stanton  had  been  in  the  field.18  Mr. 
Rhodes  speaks  quite  frankly  of  the  Secretary's 
"lack  of  physical  courage."  19  Welles  had  no 
doubt  whatever  upon  the  subject.  His  account  of 
Stanton's  behavior  after  the  murder  of  Lincoln 
should  be  read  with  care,  though  with  a  clear 
recollection  that  Welles  did  not  know  his  associ- 
ate at  all  intimately  and  saw  him,  as  for  that 
matter  he  saw  himself,  through  a  cloud  of  preju- 
dice. Still  another  paragraph  from  the  Secretary 
of  the  Navy's  "Diary"  I  cannot  resist  quoting  in 
full,  for  its  vivid  picture  of  Stanton  and  also  its 
unconscious  and  thoroughly  Pepysian  portrayal  of 
the  writer.  It  refers  to  the  wild  excitement  in  the 
Cabinet,  when  it  was  feared  that  the  Merrimac 
would  advance  upon  Washington:  "In  all  that 
painful  time  my  composure  was  not  disturbed,  so 
that  I  did  not  perhaps  as  fully  realize  and  com- 
prehend the  whole  impending  calamity  as  others, 
and  yet  to  me  there  was  throughout  the  whole  day 
something  inexpressibly  ludicrous  in  the  wild, 
frantic  talk,  action,  and  rage  of  Stanton  as  he  ran 
from  room  to  room,  sat  down  and  jumped  up 
after  writing  a  few  words,  swung  his  arms,  scolded, 
and  raved.  He  could  not  fail  to  see  and  feel  my 


174  UNION  PORTRAITS 

opinion  of  him  and  his  bluster  —  that  I  was  calm 
and  unmoved  by  his  rant,  spoke  deliberately,  and 
was  not  excited  by  his  violence."  20 

There  must  be  something  inspiring  in  the  joyous, 
salt  freedom  of  the  sea  which  could  impel  two  sec- 
retaries of  the  navy,  at  two  hundred  years'  inter- 
val, to  expose  themselves  to  posterity  with  such 
incomparable  frankness. 

II 

But  as  to  Stanton.  After  perusing  with  at- 
tention the  above  cheerful  catalogue  of  amiable 
qualities,  the  reader  must  be  inclined  to  ask, 
with  Malcolm  in  "Macbeth,"  "If  such  a  one  be 
fit  to  govern,  speak,"  and  to  expect  something 
like  MacdufFs  answer,  "Fit  to  govern,  no,  not  to 
live!" 

We  shall  try  a  little  later  to  emphasize  some 
acts  and  characteristics  of  Stanton  which  may  not 
seem  wholly  compatible  with  all  these  charges  of 
his  critics.  Meantime,  it  must  be  evident,  whether 
the  charges  are  true,  or,  still  more,  if  they  are 
exaggerated  and  untrue,  that  the  Secretary  was 
not  a  man  who  went  out  of  his  way  to  be  agree- 
able. He  certainly  was  not.  His  position  in  itself 
forced  him  to  acts  that  seemed  harsh  and  even 
cruel.  The  Secretary  of  War  had  to  tread  on 
many  toes  and  scorch  many  fingers.  But  it  is 
possible  to  tread  on  toes  so  that  the  owner  of 
them  will  remember  it  with  tolerance,  if  not  with 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  175 

amiability.  Stanton  trod  squarely  and  provoked 
a  groan  or  an  oath. 

Indeed,  there  are  many  who  agree  with  Grant 
that  the  Secretary  took  positive  pleasure  in  refus- 
ing requests  and  disappointing  suitors.21  If  this 
seems  an  extreme  view,  at  least  it  cannot  be  denied 
that  in  the  ordinary  transaction  of  business  he 
paid  little  attention  to  social  amenities.  Dana, 
who  admired  him  much,  admitted  that  he  would 
have  been  a  far  greater  man  if  he  could  have  kept 
his  temper.22  Chittenden,  who  admired  him  some- 
what less,  but  knew  him  intimately,  declares  that 
few  masters  of  literary  denunciation  were  more 
apt  at  inflicting  a  bitter  wound  in  a  brief  sen- 
tence.23 The  same  authority  adds  that  efforts  to 
ingratiate  by  compliment  were  rarely  repeated,  for 
the  Secretary  would  repel  the  first  one  by  a  shaft 
of  satire  or  a  glance  of  contempt.24  His  daily  re- 
ceptions appear  at  times  to  have  been  of  the  nature 
of  shindies.  In  one  case,  recorded  even  by  the  en- 
thusiastic biographer,  an  interview  with  a  Senator 
rose  to  such  a  pitch  of  vehemence  that  the  Secre- 
tary dashed  a  full  inkstand  all  over  the  floor, 
while  in  another  he  emerged  from  the  office  with 
his  nose  bleeding  so  freely  that  cracked  ice  was 
required  to  repair  damages.25 

There  is  abundant  and  most  curious  evidence  as 
to  the  manifestation  of  these  volcanic  peculiarities 
in  the  Secretary's  official  intercourse  with  his  sub- 
ordinates. Soldiers  are  accustomed  to  treat  one 


176  UNION  PORTRAITS 

another  with  the  precision  of  military  civility, 
prefacing  orders  with  salutation  and  politeness. 
Stanton  had  bells  put  into  the  different  rooms  of 
the  War  Office.  When  he  wanted  to  call  a  general, 
he  pulled  a  cord,  as  if  he  were  calling  a  messenger. 
Generals  did  not  like  it. 

Also,  Stanton's  manner  of  imparting  informa- 
tion and  receiving  requests  was  not  such  as  to 
inspire  cordiality  or  gratitude.  For  instance, 
Schurz  writes,  inquiring  if  he  is  relieved  from  com- 
mand. The  Secretary  replies:  "General  Hooker  is 
authorized  to  relieve  from  command  any  officer 
that  interferes  with  or  hinders  the  transportation 
of  troops  in  the  present  movement.  Whether  you 
have  done  so,  and  whether  he  has  relieved  you 
from  command,  ought  to  be  known  to  yourself."  26 
When  your  cheek  is  slapped  like  that,  it  stings  for 
some  time  after.  Again,  an  official  in  high  place 
politely  suggested  a  young  friend  for  a  position. 
"Usher/'  was  the  sharp  reply,  "I  would  not  ap- 
point the  Angel  Gabriel  a  paymaster,  if  he  was 
only  twenty-one."  27 

ill 

Undoubtedly  posterity  has  been  most  affected 
by  Stanton's  rudeness  and  violence  as  they  con- 
cerned Lincoln.  The  display  of  these  qualities 
began  long  before  the  war  and  before  the  two  men 
had  any  official  connection  with  each  other.  When 
they  were  scarcely  acquainted,  chance  brought 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON          177 

them  together  on  the  same  side  of  a  lawsuit,  and 
Lincoln  overheard  Stanton  say  that  "he  would  not 

associate  with  such  a  d d,  gawky,  long-armed 

ape  as  that."  28  After  the  war  had  begun,  Stanton, 
still  keeping  up  epistolary  intercourse  with  his 
former  chief,  Buchanan,  wrote,  in  terms  more 
civil,  but  hardly  more  complimentary:  "An  irre- 
trievable misfortune  and  national  disgrace  never 
to  be  forgotten  are  to  be  added  to  the  ruin  of  all 
peaceful  pursuits  and  national  bankruptcy,  as  the 
result  of  Lincoln's  '  running  the  machine '  for  five 
months." 29  And  to  Dix  he  expressed  himself  more 
frankly  as  to  the  "painful  imbecility  " 30  of  the  Presi- 
dent. According  to  McClellan,  his  language  in  pri- 
vate conversation  was  franker  still.  Lincoln,  he 
said,  was  the  original  gorilla,  and  Du  Chaillu  need 
not  have  gone  to  Africa  to  investigate  that  ani- 
mal. 31 

Such  utterances  are  not  recorded  of  the  Cabinet 
officer,  who  had  come  to  know  the  President  more 
intimately.  But  the  Secretary  was  just  as  ready 
to  snub  his  chief  in  the  course  of  business  as  any 
one  else.  Again  and  again  he  slighted  and  disre- 
garded Lincoln's  suggestions  and  recommenda- 
tions, in  well-authenticated  cases  going  so  far  as 
to  tear  the  President's  notes  and  fling  them  into 
the  waste-basket  before  the  eyes  of  the  bearer, 
with  an  expression  of  perfect  contempt.  Also,  the 
Secretary's  admirers,  and  perhaps  the  Secretary 
himself,  to  some  degree,  felt  that  he  was  the  Presi- 


178  UNION  PORTRAITS 

dent's  chief  monitor  and  by  peremptory  argu- 
ment could  sway  that  amiable  but  somewhat 
spineless  personage  into  the  course  dictated  by 
wisdom  and  patriotism.  An  instance  of  this,  im- 
portant if  true,  is  the  vehement  persuasion  by 
which  Stanton  is  said  to  have  modified  the  second 
inaugural,  insisting  that  his  superior  was  too  ready 
to  surrender  power  to  the  generals  in  the  field. 
Lincoln,  after  listening  to  the  Secretary's  argu- 
ments, murmured,  "You  are  right,"  seized  the 
pen,  and  made  the  changes  suggested.32 

In  spite  of  occasional  insolence,  however,  and 
of  a  tendency  to  domineer  in  small  matters,  there 
can  be  no  question  that  Stanton  came  early  to 
recognize  Lincoln's  supremacy,  and  on  vital  points, 
after  due  and  energetic  protest,  submitted  his  own 
will  to  that  of  his  chief.  When  Lincoln  had  fairly 
made  up  his  mind  to  be  obeyed,  he  was  obeyed. 
Many  cases  of  sharp  conflict  can  be  summed  up 
in  the  crucial  one  narrated  by  Nicolay  and  Hay 
in  which  the  President  backed  a  positive  order 
by  a  personal  interview.  "Mr.  President,"  said 
the  Secretary,  "I  cannot  execute  that  order." 
"Mr.  Secretary,"  replied  Lincoln,  with  perfect 
good-nature  and  with  perfect  firmness,  "I  reckon 
you'll  have  to  execute  that  order."  The  order 
was  executed.33 

And  Stanton  not  only  obeyed  his  leader,  he 
admired  and  loved  him.  From  a  man  so  sparing 
of  commendation,  written  words  like  the  following 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  179 

mean  much.  They  are  full  of  significance,  not  only 
as  to  Stanton's  own  feeling,  but  as  to  the  relations 
between  the  two  men:  "Mr.  Lincoln  was  never  a 
good  projector  and  frequently  not  a  good  manager; 
but  his  intuition  was  wonderful.  He  was  one  of 
the  best  of  men  to  have  by  the  side  of  a  projector 
or  manager.  .  .  .  Usually  his  mind  was  as  free 
from  bias  as  any  I  ever  knew,  and  it  was  a  genuine 
pleasure  to  consult  him  on  new  matters."  34 
While  the  eulogy  quoted  from  Chittenden  by  Mr. 
Rothschild,  in  his  admirable  analysis,  is  one  of  the 
finest  ever  pronounced  by  one  mortal  man  upon 
another:  "There  lies  the  most  perfect  ruler  of 
men  the  world  has  ever  seen."  35 

And  now,  how  did  Lincoln  feel  about  Stanton? 
It  would  appear  that  the  President  selected  this 
member  of  his  Cabinet  more  for  actual  merit  than 
almost  any  of  the  others.  The  War  Department 
was  the  most  important  of  all.  Up  to  January, 
1862,  Cameron  had  failed  in  it  entirely.  The  new 
man  must  be  chosen  not  for  politics,  though  a  War 
Democrat  was  desirable,  nor  for  personal  adapta- 
bility, but  because  he  could  do  the  work.  Lincoln 
had  at  the  start  certainly  no  reason  to  feel  any  af- 
fection for  Stanton.  He  must  therefore  have  picked 
him  out  by  divining  his  extraordinary  usefulness. 

Having  chosen  him,  he  proposed  to  leave  him 
free,  so  far  as  possible.  One  disappointed  applicant 
for  secretarial  favor  is  said  to  have  reported 
the  encouraging  reply  that  the  President  was  a 


180  UNION  PORTRAITS 

damned  fool.  "Did  Stanton  say  that?"  was  Lin- 
coln's serene  comment.  "Then  it  must  be  true, 
for  Stanton  is  usually  right/' 36  In  many  other 
cases  it  was  made  perfectly  evident  that,  having 
appointed  a  strong  man  to  a  difficult  place,  the 
President  felt  that  he  could  best  get  full  measure 
out  of  him  by  letting  him  have  his  head  almost  — 
not  quite  —  completely. 

And  Lincoln  not  only  tolerated  his  subordinate, 
he  defended  him.  When  it  was  urged  that  Stan- 
ton's  work  might  be  done  quite  as  well  by  some 
one  else  who  would  do  it  less  disagreeably,  the 
President  replied,  in  substance:  "Find  the  man. 
Show  me  that  he  can  do  it.  He  shall." 

Also,  there  was  love  in  that  ample  heart  for  the 
stern  Secretary,  as  well  as  respect  and  confidence. 
Does  not  all  Lincoln's  divine  tenderness  show  in 
Stanton's  own  account  of  their  last  interview, 
just  before  Lincoln's  death,  when  the  Secretary, 
feeling  that  his  task  was  done,  offered  his  resigna- 
tion, and  the  President  refused  it?  "Putting  his 
hands  on  my  shoulders,  tears  filling  his  eyes,  he 
said,  'Stanton,  you  cannot  go.  Reconstruction  is 
more  difficult  and  dangerous  than  construction  or 
destruction.  You  have  been  our  main  reliance; 
you  must  help  us  through  the  final  act.  The  bag 
is  filled.  It  must  be  tied,  and  tied  securely.  Some 
knots  slip;  yours  do  not.  You  understand  the  situa- 
tion better  than  anybody  else,  and  it  is  my  wish 
and  the  country's  that  you  remain.'"  37 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  181 

It  has,  indeed,  been  suggested  that  Stanton's 
main  use  to  his  chief  was  as  a  shield  or  buffer. 
Most  men  dislike  to  say  no.  Certainly  Lincoln  did. 
Yet  he  had  to,  till  he  must  sometimes  have  seemed 
to  himself  the  negative  personified.  Now  to  say  no 
is  thought  to  have  given  Stanton  real  pleasure. 
And  the  President  was  delighted  to  have  a  deputy 
of  such  solid  qualifications.  Grant  rejects  this  view 
on  the  ground  that  Lincoln  did  not  need  to  borrow 
backbone  from  any  one.  We  know  he  did  not. 
Yet  when  life  was  made  up  so  largely  of  doing 
disagreeable  things,  it  was  surely  policy  to  use 
a  man  who  did  them  with  masterly  ease  and 
a  connoisseur's  perfection. 


. 

Yet  probably  no  one  living  could  have  divined 
more  keenly  or  appreciated  more  sympathetically 
the  fine  qualities  of  the  subordinate  than  the 
leader  who  selected  him  and  got  out  of  him  every 
ounce  of  his  efficiency  and  usefulness.  Let  us  go 
below  the  rough  surface  and  distinguish  more 
closely  what  some  of  those  fine  qualities  were. 

To  begin  with,  in  spite  of  his  harsh,  stern  exte- 
rior, the  man  had  wonderful  depths  of  emotion 
and  nervous  sensibility.  I  think  you  can  see  it  in 
his  face  —  when  you  have  discovered  it  otherwise. 
It  was  he  who  made  that  most  original  and  subtle 
observation  —  enough  in  itself  to  mark  excep- 
tional insight  —  when  some  one  objected  to  his 


182  UNION  PORTRAITS 

criticism  of  the  meanness  in  a  man's  face  as  being 
something  for  which  the  man  was  not  responsible, 
"A  man  of  fifty  is  responsible  for  his  face."38  Apply 
the  criterion  to  its  inventor  and  you  will  see  energy 
and  determination  in  the  brow  and  eyes  and  lines 
about  the  nose,  but  assuredly  you  will  see  sensi- 
bility about  the  large  and  mobile  mouth. 

Again,  the  voice  matched  the  mouth.  It  is  said 
to  have  been  a  wonderfully  gentle,  sympathetic, 
and  responsive  voice,  never  more  so  than  when 
uttering  savage  indignation  or  bitter  criticism.39 

And  back  of  the  voice  was  a  nervous,  high- 
strung,  responsive  spirit.  When  good  fortune  came, 
the  spirit  was  exuberant,  cried  out  in  triumph, 
embraced  friends  near,  and  sent  official  telegrams 
of  boyish  exultation  to  friends  distant.  "  Good  for 
the  first  lick!  Hurrah  for  Smith  and  the  one-gun 
battery!"  40  Or  when  there  was  simply  a  relief 
from  strain,  the  emotion  was  different  but  violent 
still.  "His  real  feeling  came  to  the  surface.  Great 
tears  welled  up  in  his  eyes  and  flowed  over  his 
careworn  face."  41  With  disappointment  and  fail- 
ure the  sensibility  was  no  less,  whether  shown  in 
tears  of  bitterness  or  in  the  strange  manifestations 
of  excited  and  overwrought  nerves.  Such  things 
both  accompany  and  produce  physical  weakness, 
and  during  all  the  years  of  his  great  and  stren- 
uous service  Stanton  was  apparently  a  broken  man. 
It  is  said  that  even  before  the  war  he  had  been 
warned  by  skilled  physicians  that  unless  he  pur- 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  183 

sued  a  regular  and  quiet  life,  he  might  die  at  any 
moment.42  A  regular  and  quiet  life! 

One  frequent  concomitant  of  sensitive  nerves, 
humor,  seems  to  have  been  mainly  absent  in  Stan- 
ton.  There  are  stories  of  his  gayety  in  early  youth, 
stories  of  mirth  and  laughter  and  social  expan- 
siveness.  It  is  most  interesting  to  find  him  telling 
Dickens  that  the  novelist's  works  were  his  nightly 
resource  and  diversion  and  that  he  did  not  know 
how  he  could  get  through  his  task  without  them.43 
We  find  an  occasional  jest  on  his  lips  also.  But 
the  jests  are  apt  to  be  ardent  and  bitter.  The 
pettiness  of  even  his  vast  labors,  viewed  under  the 
aspect  of  eternity,  did  not  strike  him  as  constantly 
as  it  did  Lincoln,  and  we  learn  from  Chase  that 
when  the  President  prefaced  the  Emancipation 
Proclamation  with  choice  bits  from  Petroleum  V. 
Nasby  —  bells  tinkling  and  clattering  in  that  great 
tragic  scene  like  the  babble  of  the  clown  in  "Lear" 
—  Stanton  was  the  only  Cabinet  member  present 
who  did  not  laugh. 

But  if  he  had  not  the  twinkle  of  laughter,  he 
had  the  glow  of  deep  affection.  It  is  true,  indeed, 
that  he  does  not  appear  to  have  loved  or  trusted 
widely.  Some,  who  had  good  opportunities  for 
judging,  have  written  that  he  permitted  no  one 
to  know  him  well  and  that  no  man  so  widely 
known  was  ever  so  little  known.44  I  find  also  the 
assertion  —  startlingly  characteristic  about  any 
man  —  that  "love  was  not  necessary  to  him."  45 


184  UNION  PORTRAITS 

This  I  do  not  believe  to  be  true.  Indeed,  the 
evidence  shows  it  to  be  emphatically  untrue. 
Stanton  was  not  one  of  those  who  dissipate  their 
affection,  but  where  he  bestowed  it  entire,  it  was 
all  the  more  overwhelming.  One  need  only  read 
the  history  of  his  first  marriage  to  appreciate  this. 
It  was  a  pure  love  match,  between  a  boy  and  girl, 
and  the  husband's  devotion  was  as  complete  and 
lasting  as  was  the  father's  delight  when  children 
came  to  him.  Years  afterwards  Stanton  declared 
that  "the  happiest  hours  of  his  life  were  passed  in 
the  little  brick  house  on  Third  Street,  holding 
[his  daughter]  Lucy  on  his  knee  while  Mary  pre- 
pared the  meals."  46  The  girl  wife's  early  death 
was  the  bitterest  sorrow  Stanton  ever  knew.  For 
months  he  entirely  gave  up  his  legal  work,  spent 
hours  at  her  grave,  wandered  into  quaint  and 
melancholy  fancies  which  almost  indicated  lack  of 
mental  balance.  His  character  is  even  said  to  have 
undergone  a  fundamental  change,  the  natural 
gayety  of  his  youth  giving  place  to  a  settled  aus- 
terity and  gloom.  But  such  changes  as  this  grow 
in  the  imagination  of  those  who  narrate  them. 

One  striking  incident  of  a  later  time  illustrates 
well  the  blend  of  intense  passions  in  the  heart  of 
this  volcanic  creature.  During  his  secretaryship 
he  was  sitting  one  day  in  his  study  with  his  little 
daughter  on  his  knee.  A  friend  thought  it  a  good 
opportunity  to  plead  for  a  Southern  father  under 
sentence  of  death.  He  pointed  out  to  Stanton  the 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  185 

joy  of  his  own  fatherhood  and  the  child's  complete 
dependence  upon  him.  Stanton  assented  with  en- 
thusiasm. "But  there  are  daughters  in  the  South 
who  cherish  their  fathers  just  as  much."  "I  sup- 
pose there  are/'  was  the  indifferent  reply.  "Now 
there's  Pryor  — "  The  Secretary  instantly  pushed 
the  child  from  his  knee  and  thundered,  "He  shall 
be  hanged!  Damn  him!"  47 

It  must  not  be  inferred  from  this,  however,  that 
Stanton's  tenderness  was  confined  to  the  domestic 
circle.  Far  from  it.  He  may  not  have  made  friends 
widely,  but  he  had  a  broad  and  generous  kindli- 
ness, if  you  knew  how  to  get  at  it  and  separate  it 
from  his  temper  and  his  prejudices.  Above  all, 
where  his  heart  was  touched,  he  would  make  any 
effort  to  relieve  suffering.  As  a  mere  boy,  he  or- 
ganized a  charity  league  to  watch  with  the  sick 
and  to  assist  the  poor.48  Once,  when  he  was  travel- 
ing to  Pittsburg  by  boat,  he  found  a  poor  Irish- 
man with  a  broken  leg,  on  the  way  to  have  it  set. 
The  man  was  suffering  cruelly,  but  no  one  paid 
much  attention.  Stanton  went  to  the  carpenter 
for  tools,  made  a  splint,  set  the  leg  and  put  the 
splint  on  with  proper  bandages,  and  sat  by  the 
patient,  bathing  his  forehead,  till  the  boat  arrived.49 

Even  in  his  official  duties  the  Secretary  tem- 
pered roughness  with  sympathy  in  a  most  notable 
manner.  He  was  harsh  to  generals  with  epaulets, 
but  when  he  saw  a  crippled  soldier  waiting  pa- 
tiently, he  would  listen  to  him  first  and  speak 


186  UNION  PORTRAITS 

gently,  even  if  he  could  not  say  yes.  In  the  same 
way,  while  he  was  often  bitter  to  his  subordi- 
nates, he  often  also  regretted  his  bitterness  and 
would  show  his  regret  by  some  special  kindness  or 
unusual  display  of  confidence.  It  is  most  curious 
to  note,  however,  that  he  rarely  apologized  di- 
rectly or  admitted  that  he  had  been  wrong,  seem- 
ing to  feel  that  such  admission  would  compromise 
his  dignity.  In  this,  he  surely  showed  a  significant 
trait  of  character  and  stamped  himself  as  some- 
what below  the  greatest. 

It  is  interesting  to  have  not  only  the  testimony 
of  others  to  Stanton's  mixture  of  sympathy  with 
severity,  but  his  own  personal  confession  of  the 
strain  involved  in  the  execution  of  his  duty.  Thus, 
he  is  said  to  have  protested  with  the  utmost  so- 
lemnity, "  In  my  official  station  I  have  tried  to  do 
my  duty  as  I  shall  answer  to  God  at  the  great 
day,  but  it  is  the  misfortune  of  that  station  that 
most  of  my  duties  are  harsh  and  painful  to  some 
one,  so  that  I  rejoice  at  an  opportunity,  however 
rare,  of  combining  duty  with  kindly  offices/'  50 
Still  more  interesting  is  the  dramatic  account  of 
one  who  was  intimately  familiar  with  the  work- 
ings of  the  War  Department  and  who  one  day, 
after  watching  the  Secretary's  stern,  cold  dealings 
with  petitioners  and  resenting  them  as  almost  in- 
human, followed  without  announcement  into  his 
private  office  and  there  found  him  bent  over  his 
desk,  his  head  buried  in  his  hands,  shaken  with 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON          187 

sobs  and  wailing  in  anguish,  "God  help  me  to  do 
my  duty;  God  help  me  to  do  my  duty."  51 

It  seems  hard  to  reconcile  these  things  with  the 
legend  of  Stanton's  pleasure  in  saying  no.  Yet 
perhaps  they  are  not  wholly  incompatible,  after 
all.  In  that  case,  such  contradictions  certainly 
make  him  a  figure  of  unusual,  of  extraordinary 
interest. 


Nevertheless,  it  may  be  granted  that  Lincoln 
did  not  select  Stanton  as  Minister  of  War  for  his 
sympathy  or  for  his  gentleness.  What,  then,  were 
the  other  qualities  which  made  the  President  pick 
out  this  sturdy  agent  and  stand  by  him? 

First,  he  was  a  worker,  an  enormous  worker. 
Welles  denies  this  and  proves  by  doing  so  that  he 
did  not  know  Stanton.  For  his  inclination  and  his 
capacity  for  labor  are  beyond  dispute.  In  the 
early  law  practice  at  his  Ohio  home  he  toiled  early 
and  late  to  get  the  facts,  all  the  facts,  even  those 
irrelevant,  with  the  hope  of  finding  something 
neglected  which  would  solve  the  difficulty,  as  he 
often  did.  When  he  was  sent  to  California  by  the 
Government  to  investigate  the  old  Mexican  land 
titles,  it  is  confessed  that  his  researches  into  records 
and  documents  were  as  far-reaching  as  they  were 
fruitful.  In  the  War  Department  he  looked  into 
everything  himself,  went  into  case  after  case  with 
exhaustive  and  exhausting  thoroughness,  mastered 


188  UNION  PORTRAITS 

the  details  of  contracts,  of  supply,  of  equipment, 
of  transportation,  and  saw  that  those  details  were 
attended  to.  Executive  genius  often  consists  in 
knowing  how  to  make  others  work,  and  no  doubt 
Stanton  was  expert  in  this  function;  but  when  any- 
thing was  to  be  gained  by  doing  work  himself,  he 
did  it,  as  in  the  case  mentioned  by  Flower  of  the 
cotton  investigation  at  Savannah  in  1865.  Stanton 
selected  twenty  witnesses  out  of  a  vast  number 
present  and  wrote  down  the  testimony  of  each, 
unabridged,  though  his  assistants  offered  to  do  it 
for  him.52  He  held  that  by  doing  it  himself  he 
would  get  a  knowledge  of  the  subject  which  could 
not  be  filtered  through  any  clerk. 

Even  more  important  than  labor,  and  essential 
to  fruitful  labor,  are  method,  system,  organization. 
Stanton  possessed  this  business  instinct  in  the 
highest  degree.  From  the  moment  he  took  hold 
of  the  war  machine,  he  saw  that  every  part  was 
in  order,  so  that  his  own  work  and  others'  work 
would  not  be  thrown  away.  His  procedure  in  this 
line  was  often  vexatious,  as  when  he  arranged  to 
have  telegraphic  dispatches  from  general  to  gen- 
eral and  even  from  the  President  to  other  members 
of  the  Cabinet  pass  through  his  office  and  come 
under  his  eye,  if  necessary.  But  it  was  immensely 
thorough  and  effective.  An  exact  routine  governed 
his  daily  labor.  During  certain  hours  he  stood  at 
his  desk  and  accorded  a  systematically  propor- 
tioned allowance  of  minutes  to  the  numerous  visi- 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  189 

tors,  who  had  each  to  state  his  business  with  abso- 
lute clearness  and  brevity  and  in  a  tone  to  be  heard 
by  the  bystanders. 

But  often  the  visitor  found  his  business  stated 
for  him.  For  the  Secretary  had  little  patience  with 
many  words  and  had  a  marvelous  gift  of  divining 
what  was  wanted,  had,  indeed,  the  most  quick 
and  piercing  fashion  of  getting  at  the  heart  of 
any  piece  of  business,  before  another  would  have 
stripped  off  even  the  husk  of  it.  It  was  just  this 
keenness  of  insight  which  enabled  him,  when 
not  led  astray  by  prejudice,  to  detect  men  of  swift 
practical  ability  for  the  execution  of  his  purposes. 

And  back  of  the  labor,  the  system,  the  insight, 
was  the  animating  soul,  an  enormous,  driving 
energy,  which  thrust  right  on  through  obstacles 
and  difficulties,  would  not  yield,  would  not  falter, 
would  not  turn  back.  Sometimes  this  energy  was 
misdirected  and  overzealous,  as  in  some  of  the 
arbitrary  arrests  for  treason,  which  may  have 
done  more  harm  than  good.  But  lesser  men,  who 
stop  to  hesitate  and  question,  cannot  but  wonder 
at  the  splendid,  forthright,  overpowering  accom- 
plishment. As  Thurlow  Weed  wrote,  divining  the 
future  in  1861:  "  While  I  was  in  the  White  House, 
I  looked  over  that  new  Attorney-General  of  ours. 
He  is  tremendous/'  53 

This  abounding  vigor  showed  in  the  Secretary's 
words,  written  and  spoken.  "The  very  demon  of 
lying  seems  to  be  about  these  times,  and  generals 


190  UNION  PORTRAITS 

will  have  to  be  broken  for  ignorance  before  they 
will  take  the  trouble  to  find  out  the  truth  of  re- 
ports/' 64  It  showed  constantly  in  his  actions. 
When  he  went  West  to  push  a  military  movement, 
the  train  was  driven  as  it  had  never  been  driven 
before.  "Shall  we  get  there? "  asked  Stanton,  anx- 
ious to  drive  harder.  "Great  God!"  answered  the 
engineer,  "you'll  get  through  alive  if  I  do."  55 

As  you  follow  the  different  phases  of  Stanton's 
activity,  you  will  be  amazed  to  see  this  clear-eyed, 
ordered  energy  displayed  in  all  of  them.  Supplies? 
He  gets  supplies  on  honest  contracts,  of  the  stipu- 
lated quality,  and  furnishes  them,  when  and  where 
needed.  A  navy?  If  he  wants  a  navy  on  the 
Western  rivers,  and  Father  Noah  or  Father  Nep- 
tune—  Welles,  of  the  patriarchal  beard,  was 
known  by  either  title  —  frets  and  fidgets  over 
difficulties,  he  just  makes  a  navy,  out  of  nothing. 
Railroads?  The  very  life  and  heart  of  the  war 
depend  on  railroads.  Stanton  sees  it  and  gets  men 
like  Haupt  and  McCallum  out  of  civil  life  to  do 
feats  of  engineering  which  command  the  admira- 
tion not  of  America  only,  but  of  the  world. 

Or,  in  another  connection,  take  Stanton's  han- 
dling of  the  state  governors,  so  justly  praised  by 
Mr.  Rhodes.  Tact  and  patience  were  needed  here 
to  adjust  endless  tangles  of  red  tape.  The  Secre- 
tary showed  that,  if  required,  he  had  the  tact 
and  the  patience  as  well  as  the  energy. 

That  a  man  of  this  stamp  should  have  been  a 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON          191 

personal  coward  is  very  difficult  to  believe.  I  am 
inclined  to  think  that  any  charges  made  against 
Stanton  in  this  line  are  based  upon  the  vagaries 
of  a  highly  excitable  temperament,  which  may 
have  momentarily  betrayed  its  possessor  in  the 
quick  presence  of  certain  kinds  of  physical  peril. 
However  this  may  be,  the  man  gave  many  proofs 
of  complete  indifference  to  danger  when  he  was 
doing  his  duty.  Thus,  in  defending  a  poisoner,  with 
the  object  of  testing  the  drug  used,  he  took  a  good 
dose  of  it  himself  and  was  seriously  ill  in  conse- 
quence.56 Again,  when  cholera  was  prevailing,  he 
stepped  right  in  and  worked  among  the  sick,  after 
priest  and  doctor  had  deserted  them,  and  went  so 
far  as  to  open  the  coffin  of  a  young  girl,  because 
he  had  some  fear  that  she  might  have  been  buried 
alive.57  These  are  not  exactly  the  actions  of  a 
coward. 

Whether  physically  brave  or  not,  Stanton  as- 
suredly did  not  in  general  lack  the  moral  cour- 
age to  say  no.  Graft,  corruption,  and  dishonesty 
withered  when  they  came  within  his  touch. 
Welles,  always  resourceful  in  fault-finding,  and 
brought  up  in  good  traditions  of  New  England 
thrift,  declares  that  his  colleague  was  utterly  waste- 
ful of  public  money,  and  that  anybody  could  be 
a  great  war  minister  who  did  not  care  what  he 
spent.  Perhaps  the  absurdity  of  the  latter  asser- 
tion may  help  to  discredit  the  former,  which  is 
not  generally  made  or  accepted.  At  any  rate, 


192  UNION  PORTRAITS 

neither  Welles  nor  any  one  else  ever  accused  the 
Secretary  of  direct  or  indirect  peculation,  or  even 
ventured  to  imply  that  the  war  brought  him  per- 
sonal profit.  On  the  contrary,  he  left  office  and  died 
poorer  than  he  was  at  an  earlier  period.  Before 
his  death  he  was  in  actual  distress  and  obliged 
to  borrow  money  for  his  immediate  necessities. 
Yet  he  obstinately  refused  a  large  sum  subscribed 
by  his  friends,  not  as  charity,  but  in  simple  rec- 
ognition of  his  splendid  service  to  his  country. 

Thus  it  is  evident  that  he  was  capable  of  great 
personal  sacrifice,  and  this  is  true,  not  only  as 
regards  money,  but  as  regards  other  things.  Dur- 
ing the  time  of  his  public  service  he  gave  up  all 
social  diversion,  all  amusement  of  any  kind,  that 
every  minute  might  be  devoted  to  the  duties  of  his 
office.  That  his  acceptance  of  a  Cabinet  position 
was  as  entirely  a  matter  of  sacrifice  as  he  asserted 
may  be  open  to  some  doubt.  The  love  of  power 
and  the  ambition  to  exercise  it  were  vital  to  his 
temperament,  and  to  be  the  motive  force  in  such 
an  event  as  the  Civil  War  was  an  opportunity  no 
lover  of  power  could  despise.  But  it  may  be  said 
with  justice  that  Stanton  was  one  of  the  few  men 
of  his  calibre  who  never  gave  a  thought  to  the 
Presidency,  and  it  is  probable  that,  as  the  war 
progressed,  every  conscious  personal  preoccupa- 
tion became  merged  in  the  daily  and  nightly 
struggle  to  perform  tasks  too  mighty  for  any 
human  brains  or  shoulders. 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  193 

VI 

In  the  performance  of  these  tasks  we  see  Stanton 
rather  as  doer  than  as  thinker.  His  keen  intelli- 
gence was  the  servant  of  his  will,  not  the  master 
of  it.  And  though  he  would  have  much  preferred 
thinking  on  abstract  problems  to  being  quiet,  his 
abstract  thinking  has  little  interest  except  as  de- 
veloping his  character.  In  youth  he  ardently  de* 
sired  to  write  a  book  on  "The  Poetry  of  the  Bible," 
calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  "  God,  in  all  his 
communications  with  man,  clothed  his  language 
in  the  highest  imagery/'  58  I  am  glad  he  did  not, 
as  I  should  have  had  to  read  it. 

Also,  his  intellectual  quality,  from  the  religious 
point  of  view,  is  well  indicated  in  the  account 
of  his  settlement  of  speculative  difficulties.  "Mr. 
Stanton  always  had  a  profound  reverence  for  the 
Supreme  Being,  but  at  one  time  was  disinclined 
to  regard  the  Bible  as  an  inspired  work.  Finally 
he  took  a  copy  of  it  into  a  room  in  his  dwelling, 
and,  turning  the  key,  resolved  not  to  come  forth 
until  he  had  satisfied  himself  on  that  point.  He 
continued  in  his  room  so  long  a  time  that  his 
young  wife  became  alarmed,  fearing  he  was  going 
crazy.  He  emerged  at  last  fully  satisfied  that  the 
Bible  is  what  it  purports  to  be,  the  Word  of  God, 
and  he  never  thereafter  doubted."  69  This  seems 
more  like  the  "will  to  believe"  cutting  the 
Gordian  knots  of  theology  than  like  patient  intel- 


194  UNION  PORTRAITS 

ligence  seeking  to  unravel  them  by  curious  analy- 
sis. 

Stanton's  general  intellectual  force  is  well  gauged 
by  the  extraordinary  paragraph  in  his  letter  to 
Dana,  written  in  February,  1862:  "Much  has 
been  said  of  military  combinations  and  organizing 
victory.  I  hear  such  phrases  with  apprehension. 
They  commenced  in  infidel  France  with  the  Italian 
campaigns  and  resulted  in  Waterloo.  Who  can 
organize  victory?  Who  can  combine  the  elements 
of  success  on  the  battlefield?  We  owe  our  recent 
victories  to  the  spirit  of  the  Lord  that  moved  our 
soldiers  to  rush  into  battle  and  filled  the  hearts  of 
our  enemies  with  dismay/'  60 

This  sort  of  thing  recalls  the  talk  —  not  the 
action  —  of  Stonewall  Jackson,  and  in  some  re- 
spects there  was  a  striking  resemblance  between 
the  two  men.  Neither  was  attractive  in  his  or- 
dinary relations  with  his  fellows.  Neither  treated 
his  subordinates  with  tact  or  tenderness.  Each 
had  the  energy,  the  resistless  rush,  of  a  natural 
force,  overcoming  all  obstacles  in  the  indomitable 
effort  to  attain  a  simple  end.  That  the  likeness 
does  not  extend  to  actual  military  genius,  it  is 
hardly  necessary  to  point  out.  Stanton's  biog- 
rapher does,  indeed,  maintain  that  his  favorite 
showed  himself  a  great  general  by  capturing  Nor- 
folk. I  am  not  aware  that  this  conclusion  is 
shared  by  any  other  writer  about  the  Civil  War. 
On  the  contrary,  many  hold  that  the  Secretary 


EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON  195 

had  a  singular  gift  for  thwarting  the  military  in- 
spirations of  others. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  simple  end 
toward  which  all  Stanton's  energies  were  directed: 
it  was  not  personal  advantage;  it  was  not  party 
triumph;  it  was  not  even  the  abolition  of  slavery; 
it  was  constantly  and  above  everything  the  resto- 
ration and  preservation  of  the  Union.  That  he 
was  always  discreet  or  tactful  in  laboring  for  this 
end  will  be  maintained  by  no  one.  Sometimes  there 
was  an  element  of  pig-headed  obstinacy  in  his 
effort,  as  in  the  contest  with  Andrew  Johnson  over 
the  War  Department  in  1866,  when  the  Secretary 
may  have  been  right  in  principle,  but  appears 
almost  as  undignified  as  the  President  in  actual 
method.  Yet  under  all  tactlessness  and  all  indis- 
cretion there  lay  the  one  passionate,  masterful, 
irresistible  purpose,  to  fight  over  all  things  and 
through  all  things  and  beyond  all  things  that  the 
inheritors  of  the  American  Revolution  on  this 
continent  might  form  but  one  indissoluble,  pros- 
perous, peaceful  nation,  the  United  States  of 
America. 

"If  the  Cause  fails,  you  and  I  will  be  covered 
with  prosecutions,  imprisoned,  driven  from  the 
country/'  said  Morton  to  Stanton.  And  Stanton 
answered,  in  his  softest  voice,  "  If  the  Cause  fails, 
I  do  not  care  to  live."  61 

Also,  his  own  written  words  give  a  noble,  an 
imperishable  reiteration  and  elaboration  of  the 


196  UNION  PORTRAITS 

same  idea:  "I  hold  my  present  post  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  President,  who  knew  me  personally, 
but  to  whom  I  had  not  spoken  from  the  4th  of 
March,  1861,  until  the  day  he  handed  me  my  com- 
mission. I  knew  that  everything  I  cherished  and 
hold  dear  would  be  sacrificed  by  accepting  office. 
But  I  thought  I  might  help  to  save  the  country 
and  for  that  I  was  willing  to  perish.  If  I  wanted  to 
be  a  politician  or  a  candidate  for  any  office,  would 
I  stand  between  the  treasury  and  the  robbers  who 
are  howling  around  me?  Would  I  provoke  and 
stand  against  the  whole  newspaper  gang  in  the 
country,  of  every  party,  who  to  sell  news  would 
imperil  a  battle?  I  was  never  taken  for  a  fool,  but 
there  could  be  no  greater  madness  than  for  a  man 
to  encounter  what  I  do  for  anything  else  than 
motives  that  overleap  time  and  look  forward  to 
eternity.  I  believe  that  God  Almighty  founded 
this  Government  and  for  my  acts  in  the  effort 
to  maintain  it  I  expect  to  stand  before  Him  in 
judgment/'  62 

It  is  perhaps  permitted  to  a  man  to  be  exceed- 
ingly disagreeable,  when  he  feels  and  thinks  and 
speaks  like  that. 


VII 
WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Florida,  New  York,  May  16, 1801. 
Entered  Union  College,  1816. 
Graduated,  Union  College,  1820. 
Admitted  to  the  bar,  1822. 
Married  Frances  Miller,  October  20,  1824, 
State  Senator,  1831-34. 
Governor  of  New  York,  1838-42. 
United  States  Senator,  1849-61. 
Secretary  of  State,  1861-69. 
Went  round  the  world,  1869,  1870. 
Died,  October  10,  1872. 


VII 

WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD 
I 

THE  problem  with  Seward  is  exactly  the  reverse 
of  that  with  Stanton.  In  Stanton's  case  we  had  to 
discover  the  strong  qualities  which  enabled  the 
man  to  make  his  way  in  spite  of  an  extreme  and 
well-founded  unpopularity.  Seward,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  generally  popular,  and  aimed  to  be  so, 
to  such  an  extent  that  it  might  at  first  be  ques- 
tioned whether  this  was  not  the  main  basis  of  his 
distinguished  success. 

He  played  politics  as  naturally  as  he  breathed. 
In  1830,  when  only  twenty-nine  years  old,  he 
entered  the  senate  of  his  native  State,  New  York. 
With  suitable  intervals  of  law,  he  became  Governor 
and  United  States  Senator,  and  did  all  that  a 
party  leader  could  do  to  be  nominated  for  the 
Presidency,  instead  of  Lincoln,  in  1860.  Failing  in 
this,  he  was  content  to  be,  on  the  whole,  the  ablest 
and  most  influential  member  of  the  Cabinet  under 
Lincoln  and  Andrew  Johnson. 

He  studied,  or  acquired  without  study,  the  art 
of  influencing  and  persuading  men.  He  was  not 
a  great  orator,  like  Webster,  or  even  Sumner,  had 
no  stately  and  impressive  manner,  dealt  compara- 


200  UNION  PORTRAITS 

tively  little  in  orotund  and  swelling  periods.  His 
voice  was  not  attractive  and  his  carriage  not  al- 
ways graceful.  Yet  what  he  said  had  great  effect, 
because  it  was  simple,  direct,  and  natural.  He 
spoke  in  public  like  a  man  talking  at  his  fireside 
and  persuaded  you  because  he  seemed  to  be  taking 
you  right  into  the  movement  of  his  thoughts.  Yet 
with  this  appearance  of  candor  he  had  the  very 
great  art  of  combining  the  most  careful  study  and 
preparation.  Halleck's  scornful  remark  about  him, 
that  "these  infernal  old  political  humbugs  cannot 
tell  the  truth  even  when  it  is  for  their  interest  to 
do  so/' l  is  quite  inappropriate.  Seward  knew  per- 
fectly well  when  to  plan  to  tell  the  truth  and  when 
not. 

He  worked  out  his  speeches  with  the  utmost 
care,  turned  them  over  to  the  reporters  before  he 
delivered  them,  and  always,  always  looked  far 
beyond  the  immediate  audience,  whether  it  was 
the  United  States  Senate  or  a  nondescript  political 
gathering,  to  the  vast  congregation  of  the  Amer- 
ican people.  Few  of  our  statesmen  have  made 
themselves  so  widely  listened  to  and  appreciated 
as  he.  This  Lincoln  knew,  and  estimated  Seward's 
eloquence  exactly  at  its  true  value.  They  were 
once  making  a  trip  in  a  sleeping-car  together,  and 
when  they  stopped  at  some  small  town,  there  was 
clamor  for  a  speech.  Lincoln  absolutely  refused, 
said  he  had  to  do  enough  of  it  in  Washington. 
Then,  rolling  over  in  his  berth,  he  murmured, 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  201 

"Seward,  you  go  out  and  repeat  some  of  your 
poetry  to  the  people."  2 

But  Seward  had  resources  of  political  manage- 
ment far  broader  than  his  tongue.  His  partial 
biographer  says  that  he  had  no  capacity  for  polit- 
ical intrigue.3  On  the  other  hand,  one  who  knew 
him  well  and  admired  him  greatly  declares  that 
"he  combined  men  largely  through  their  selfish, 
not  their  holier  affections;  their  love  of  themselves 
rather  than  of  their  fellow  creatures  or  of  God.  As 
a  consequence  he  was  followed  to  his  grave  by 
only  a  few  men  beholden  to  him  for  political  favors 
—  outside  of  his  own  townsmen."  4 

It  is  certain  that,  whether  by  intrigue  or  not, 
Seward  had  an  extraordinary  faculty  of  developing 
and  directing  political  movements.  He  had  two 
qualities  of  the  greatest  value  in  this  regard.  One 
was  the  ability  to  give  an  impression  of  power. 
This  particularly  affected  Schurz.  "He  made 
upon  me,  as  well  as  upon  many  others,  the  impres- 
sion of  a  man  who  controlled  hidden,  occult  powers 
which  he  could  bring  into  play  if  he  would." B  Sew- 
ard's  other  gift  was  that  of  enlisting  the  devoted 
service  of  men  who  admired  and  believed  in  him 
and  were  able  and  willing  to  do  things  he  did  not 
care  to  do  himself.  By  far  the  most  important 
among  these  followers  was  Thurlow  Weed,  who 
may  be  regarded  as  Seward's  evil  angel  or  familiar 
devil,  just  as  you  please.  Accident  brought  them 
together  and  mutual  usefulness  bred  a  deep  affec- 


202  UNION  PORTRAITS 

tion.  Weed  was  by  no  means  the  thoroughly  cor- 
rupt New  York  politician  of  later  days.  He  played 
the  game  more  for  the  pleasure  of  it  than  for  per- 
sonal profit.  But  he  knew  every  move  and  in- 
vented some  not  known  to  others,  and  as  manager, 
mentor,  and  scapegoat,  all  in  one,  he  was  an  indis- 
pensable aid  in  the  perfecting  of  Seward's  ample 
career. 

It  would  be  a  mistake,  however,  to  suppose  that 
Seward's  popularity  was  all  a  matter  of  political 
calculation.  He  was  liked  because  he  was  likeable, 
because  he  was  amiable,  because  he  met  cour- 
teously not  only  courtesy,  but  discourtesy  and 
churlishness  also.  He  himself  said,  "  We  never  can 
succeed  by  making  people  mad/' 6  and  though 
there  are  some  who  pursue  this  policy  to  the  point 
of  exasperation,  Seward  apparently  did  not.  If 
his  antagonists  abused  him,  he  turned  it  off  with 
a  soft  answer.  "Benjamin,"  he  remarked,  after 
the  Jewish  Senator  had  been  particularly  violent, 
"give  me  a  cigar  and  when  your  speech  is  printed 
send  me  a  copy."  7  Lincoln  said  of  him  that  he 
was  "a  man  without  gall,"  8  and  Dana  that 
though  forever  in  fights,  he  had  almost  no  personal 
enemies.9  Seward  himself  repeatedly  contributes 
his  own  testimony  as  to  this  beatific  atmosphere 
in  which  he  lived.  He  had  no  enemies,  he  tells  us, 
was  on  good  terms  with  every  one,  all  the  Senators 
were  well-disposed  toward  him.  As  to  his  own 
State,  he  asserts,  with  touching  candor:  "I  have 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  203 

not  one  enemy  in  this  section  to  forgive.  I  know 
of  no  one  who  will  utter  a  personal  complaint 
against  me."  10 

It  is  true,  there  are  some  discordant  voices.  The 
temper  on  which  the  Secretary  prided  himself  did 
flaw  occasionally,  as  when  he  told  the  President 
that  there  were  too  many  secretaries  of  state  in 
Washington,11  or  snapped  out  at  a  troublesome 
applicant  for  office:  "Why  come  to  me  about  this? 
Go  to  the  White  House!  I,  who  by  every  right 
ought  to  have  been  chosen  President,  what  am  I 
now?  Nothing  but  Abe  Lincoln's  little  —  clerk."12 

Also,  there  is  the  crusty  Welles,  who  leaves  no 
illusions  unshattered  and  liked  Seward  very  little 
better  than  he  liked  Stanton.  Temper?  He  can 
tell  stories  of  the  Secretary's  temper!  No  enemies? 
It  sounds  well,  but  the  truth  is  Seward  is  univer- 
sally distrusted  and  disliked,  and  not  without  some 
cause.13  As  for  the  State  of  New  York,  Welles  ac- 
companied a  presidential  party  to  the  Secretary's 
home  town,  Auburn,  and  found  it  a  nest  of  petty 
bickerings  and  jealousies.14 

But  Welles  must  not  mislead  us,  and  Seward's 
great  personal  charm,  in  private  life  as  well  as  in 
public,  is  undeniable.  Socially  he  seems  to  have 
been  delightful.  He  liked  ease  and  good  cheer  to 
such  a  point  that  absurd  charges  of  excess  were 
sometimes  brought  against  him.  He  was  a  most 
interesting  and  vivid  talker,  and  what  is  curious 
about  the  record  of  his  conversation  is  that  it  was 


204  UNION  PORTRAITS 

not  in  the  least  that  of  a  man  who  is  making  an 
effort  to  please  or  to  seduce,  but  was  frank,  straight- 
forward, and  thoroughly  personal,  sometimes  even 
to  the  point  of  indiscretion  or  oddity.  Above  all, 
he  had  the  art,  so  rare  in  great  talkers  and  in  men 
who  have  made  their  way  in  the  world,  of  being 
a  good  listener.  In  short,  it  appears  that  he  had 
a  remarkable  and  often  exquisite  gift  of  adapta- 
bility. 

Then  he  was  by  nature  full  of  joy  and  hope. 
Occasional  hints  of  depression  do  occur  in  the 
enormous  mass  of  his  correspondence,  like  the 
following:  "This  day  has  been  a  worthless  one. 
I  feel  wretchedly,  always,  when  I  have  to  retire  to 
bed  with  the  reflection  that  I  have  accomplished 
nothing  I  ought  to  have  done,  and  learned  noth- 
ing I  ought  to  know/'  15  But  these  bits  are  very 
rare  and  sound,  like  the  above,  as  if  written  partly 
for  effect.  There  are  few  men  who  have  been  so 
charmed  at  birth  by  the  goddess  of  good-humor. 
The  touch  of  this  deity  sometimes  gets  her  favor- 
ites into  trouble.  But,  after  all,  could  a  man 
desire  a  sweeter  eulogy  than  that  bestowed  by 
Seward's  son  upon  his  father,  and  no  doubt  true 
at  all  periods  of  life?  "The  house  was  always 
cheerful  when  he  was  in  it."  16 

Whether  back  of  this  constant  amiability  and 
gayety  there  was  any  very  profound  sympathy  or 
tenderness  is  open  to  doubt.  Do  these  bright  and 
cheerful  spirits  ever  deal  extensively  in  overpower- 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  205 

ing  and  concentrated  emotion?  Seward's  love  for 
his  wife  and  children  is  always  manifest  and 
always  attractive.  To  his  wife  especially  he  writes 
with  intimate  candor  and  deep  respect  and  regard 
for  her  most  helpful  judgment.  Also,  he  did  many 
acts  of  thoughtful  kindness.  As  a  single  example 
of  these  one  should  read  Mrs.  Jefferson  Davis's 
account  of  his  frequent  visits 'to  her  husband  during 
a  severe  illness  and  of  the  benefit  derived  from  his 
serene  and  comforting  presence.  Another  signifi- 
cant bit  of  real  human  feeling  is  the  Secretary's 
attempt  to  keep  a  diary  when  he  first  entered 
Lincoln's  Cabinet  and  his  decision  to  drop  it, 
after  a  very  few  days,  because,  if  veracious,  it 
would  involve  recording  so  much  that  was  petty 
and  disagreeable.17  These  scruples  do  not  seem 
to  have  beset  the  worthy  Gideon  Welles.  More- 
over, Seward  had  unquestionably  a  keen  sensitive- 
ness to  the  sight  of  trouble  and  distress.  Although 
an  experienced  lawyer,  the  torture  to  which  one 
poor  criminal  was  subjected  in  court  affected  him 
so  deeply  that  he  was  obliged  to  leave  the  court- 
room completely  overcome  by  tears. 

Yet,  in  spite  of  all  this,  I  do  not  get  the  impres- 
sion of  a  man  whose  affections  could  ever  seriously 
disturb  his  peace.  There  are  even  those  who  say 
that  the  amiability  and  kindness  were  largely 
rooted  in  worldly  wisdom.  Thus,  the  venomous 
Gurowski,  after  remarking  that  the  Secretary  of 
State  is  by  no  means  given  to  speaking  evil  of  any 


206  UNION  PORTRAITS 

one,  feels  constrained  to  add  that  this  is  a  matter 
of  policy.18  And  a  far  juster  observer  than  Gurow- 
ski  asserts,  in  contradiction  of  Seward's  own  con- 
fession that  he  had  no  memory  for  injuries,19  that 
"he  was  a  good  hater  and  lay  in  wait  to  punish 
his  foes,"  instancing  the  disasters  which  fell  upon 
New  York  Republicans  who  had  opposed  the 
Senator's  nomination  for  the  Presidency.20 

So  the  penalty  that  attends  a  generally  amiable 
and  courteous  manner  —  that  of  being  called  in- 
sincere —  was  not  escaped  by  Seward,  any  more 
than  by  others.  At  the  beginning  of  his  public  life 
Clay  said  that  he  had  no  convictions.21  At  the 
end  of  it  Andrew  Johnson,  with  fine  ingratitude, 
repeated,  in  his  odd  vocabulary,  that  "Mr.  Seward 
seems  to  have  no  cardinals." 22  Blair  believed  that 
the  Secretary  would  betray  any  man  who  stood 
in  his  way,23  and  Welles  expresses  or  implies  a 
similar  view  ad  libitum. 

Seward's  half-ironical  fashion  of  talking  en- 
couraged many  of  these  interpretations.  Thus, 
he  said  to  Piatt,  condemning  his  own  "higher 
law"  speech,  "My  young  friend,  we  are  warned 
to  keep  to  ourselves  what  we  do  not  believe.  It  is 
as  well,  frequently,  to  conceal  what  we  do  believe. 
There  is  apt  to  be  public  damnation  in  both."24 
In  the  very  remarkable  scene  described  so  vividly 
by  Mrs.  Davis,  when  Seward  had  smilingly  avowed 
that  a  good  deal  of  his  anti-slavery  talk  was  for 
mere  political  purposes,  and  the  great  Southern 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  207 

leader,  scandalized,  asked,  "But,  Mr.  Seward,  do 
you  never  speak  from  conviction  alone?"  the 
answer  was,  "Nev-er."  25  To  which  Mrs.  Davis 
adds  the  Secretary's  frank  avowal  that  truth 
should  always  be  made  subsidiary  to  an  end,  and 
if  another  statement  could  subserve  that  end  he 
made  it.26  Now  we  see  perfectly  well  that  Seward 
was  insincere  in  asserting  his  own  insincerity. 
But  such  talk  does  harm  with  those  who  do  not 
go  below  the  surface. 

II 

And  so  much  for  Seward  the  popular  orator, 
the  dexterous  and  insinuating  politician.  But  there 
is  another  side  of  the  man,  a  most  important  side. 
Perhaps  I  cannot  introduce  it  better  than  with  a 
striking  passage  written  by  Godkin,  in  1859:  "He 
has,  through  twenty-five  years  of  public  life,  been 
the  steady  and  fearless  champion  of  an  unpopular 
cause,  and  he  has  every  year,  in  speeches  and 
state  papers,  given  abundant  evidence  of  the  pos- 
session of  the  highest  order  of  talent.  .  .  .  Perhaps 
the  greatest  constitutional  lawyer  in  America,  the 
clearest-headed  statesman,  a  powerful  and  above 
all  a  most  logical  orator,  and  of  all  the  public  men 
of  this  country  perhaps  the  least  of  a  demagogue 
and  the  most  of  a  gentleman."  27 

While  Seward's  keenest  admirers  to-day  would 
hardly  insist  upon  the  whole  of  this  eulogy,  much 
of  it  can  be  supported  by  indisputable  evidence. 


208  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Thus,  however  often  he  may  have  trifled,  or 
appeared  to  trifle,  there  were  times,  many  times, 
when  Seward  took  life  with  energetic  earnestness. 
He  made  his  governorship  a  serious  business,  he 
made  his  senatorship  a  serious  business,  he  made 
his  secretaryship  a  serious  business.  It  may  be 
urged  that  in  age  he  was  more  inclined  to  take 
things  lightly  than  in  youth,  but  I  doubt  it,  though 
his  own  observation  that  in  his  younger  days  men 
were  more  serious  than  later  may  be  read  either 
way.28  Some  say  that  he  catered  to  temporary 
popularity;  but  did  ever  any  fighter  speak  out  with 
more  trumpet  resonance  against  unmanly  yielding? 
"They  tell  us  that  we  are  to  encounter  opposition. 
Why,  bless  my  soul,  did  anybody  ever  expect  to 
reach  a  fortune,  or  fame,  or  happiness  on  earth, 
or  a  crown  in  heaven,  without  encountering  re- 
sistance and  opposition?  What  are  we  made  men 
for  but  to  encounter  and  overcome  opposition 
arrayed  against  us  in  the  line  of  our  duty?"  29 

Again,  he  could  be  not  only  earnest  in  thought, 
but  a  tremendous  worker.  As  a  lawyer,  indeed,  he 
shirked  work  when  he  could,  because  he  hated  it. 
Law  to  him  was  a  waste  of  time  and  an  enemy  to 
the  peace  of  life,  whether  lawyer's  life  or  client's. 
In  his  vivid,  petulant  way  he  cries  out,  "I  fear, 
abhor,  detest,  despise,  and  loathe  litigation.  The 
irascible,  the  headstrong,  and  the  obstinate  pity 
my  peaceful  disposition;  yet  they  solicit  my  aid 
to  extricate  them." 30  Still,  even  in  law  he  could 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  209 

do  more  in  hours  than  others  in  days  and  in  his 
political  calling  he  would  labor  enormously.  AT 
Governor,  as  Senator,  as  Secretary,  he  performed 
cheerfully  more  than  his  duty  thrust  upon  him 
and  he  had  that  instinct  of  system  which  doubles 
the  result  of  labor  while  it  halves  the  burden.  As 
with  other  things,  he  knew  clearly  what  his  own 
faculty  of  labor  was,  and,  as  with  other  things,  he 
could  make  a  jest  of  it.  To  Weed,  who  had  pointed 
out  various  matters  that  needed  attention,  he 
writes:  "I  thought  I  had  as  much  industry  as 
anybody  around  me,  and  with  it  a  little  versatility. 
But  I  know  nobody  and  never  did  know  that  one 
man  who  could  do  all  you  seem  to  think  I  neglect 
to  do,  as  well  as  all  the  labor  I  actually  perform." 31 
Some  survey  of  the  various  lines  of  his  activity 
will  bring  out  more  clearly  how  positive  and  unfail- 
ing it  was.  Of  course  the  great  political  question 
all  through  his  career  was  slavery,  and  on  this 
he  certainly  cannot  be  ranked  among  the  ardent 
idealists.  It  is  true  that  in  the  earlier  years  of  his 
senatorship  the  great  wave  of  anti-slavery  enthu- 
siasm lifted  him,  to  some  extent,  off  his  feet  and 
carried  him  to  the  climax  of  asserting  that  there 
was  a  law  higher  than  the  Constitution,  a  climax 
which  probably  astonished  him  as  it  did  every  one 
else,  especially  when  it  became  one  of  the  most 
telling  catchwords  of  the  reform  party.  But  we 
have  seen  him  admitting  to  Davis  that  his  sym- 
pathy with  the  slaves  was  at  least  partly  assumed, 


210  UNION  PORTRAITS 

and  in  his  very  remarkable  conversation  with 
Godkin  and  Norton,  after  the  war,  the  same  at- 
titude is  even  more  obvious.  "The  North  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  negroes.  I  have  no  more 
concern  for  them  than  I  have  for  the  Hottentots. 
They  are  God's  poor;  they  always  have  been  and 
always  will  be  so  everywhere.  They  are  not  of 
our  race.  They  will  find  their  place.  They  must 
take  their  level/' 32 

Schurz  remarks,  with  some  justice,  that  in  his 
conduct  of  diplomacy  Seward  would  never  take 
the  full  advantage  that  the  slavery  question  af- 
forded him.33  He  was  careful  to  instruct  our  rep- 
resentatives at  foreign  courts  not  to  insist  too 
strongly  on  the  moral  issue  at  the  bottom  of  the 
struggle  and  to  point  out  that  the  Government  was 
not  endeavoring  so  much  to  destroy  slavery  as  to 
maintain  the  Union. 

It  is  in  this  last  connection  that  Seward's 
abundant  and  energetic  patriotism  is  at  all  times 
manifest.  The  unity,  the  solidarity  of  the  Ameri- 
can people,  in  the  light  of  their  historic  past  and 
their  incomparable  future,  was  such  an  intense 
reality  to  him  that  he  would  not  allow  for  an  in- 
stant that  it  could  be  shattered,  that  there  was  any 
danger  of  its  being  shattered.  This  overconfidence 
may  at  times  have  made  him  blind  to  the  perils  of 
the  situation,  but  beyond  doubt  it  was  a  splendid, 
animating  force  to  him  and  to  others. 

It  was  this  love  of  the  Union  which,  during  his 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  211 

senatorship,  made  him  resist  what  he  felt  to  be 
the  fatal  encroachments  of  the  slave  power,  while 
at  the  same  time  he  studied  every  legitimate 
means  of  compromise  and  harmony. 

It  was  the  love  of  the  Union  and  not  entirely 
personal  motives,  which  made  him  disappointed 
when  the  nomination  for  the  Presidency  went  to 
an  insignificant  Illinois  lawyer  instead  of  to  him- 
self. 

It  was  the  love  of  the  Union  which  led  him  to 
accept  the  position  of  Secretary  under  the  said 
lawyer,  with  the  feeling  that  as  the  real  head  of 
the  Cabinet  and  of  the  Government  he  could 
accomplish  almost  as  much  as  in  the  presidential 
chair.  And  it  was  in  the  same  spirit  of  patriotism 
that  he  fought  desperately  against  what  he  be- 
lieved the  disastrous  plan  of  relieving  Sumter, 
keeping  up  a  semi-diplomatic  intercourse  with  the 
Confederate  commissioners  and  deceiving  them, 
in  fact,  if  not  in  intention,  because  he  had  first 
deceived  himself. 

It  was  still  the  love  of  the  Union,  as  well  as  the 
love  of  personal  leadership,  which  prompted  the 
Secretary  to  submit  to  his  chief  those  extraordi- 
nary "Thoughts  for  the  President's  Considera- 
tion/' which  show  how  the  wisest  of  men  may  be 
misled  by  a  too  high  estimate  of  his  own  impor- 
tance.34 I  know  how  to  run  the  Government,  I  can 
run  it,  and  I  will  run  it  —  if  you  wish  me  to,  said 
this  document  in  effect.  The  President's  mild 


212  UNION  PORTRAITS 

reply  that  he  did  not  wish  it  began  the  gradual 
adjustment  of  relations  between  the  two.  But 
Seward's  love  of  the  Union  was  as  present  as 
ever  in  his  loyal  acceptance  of  the  supremacy  of 
the  natural  ruler  whom  destiny  had  set  over  him. 

The  growth  of  confidence  and  affection  between 
Lincoln  and  Seward  is  delightful  to  study.  To  be 
sure,  it  was  not  in  Seward's  nature  to  recognize  a 
superior,  and  to  the  end  he  nursed  the  illusion  of 
the  importance  of  his  influence,  an  illusion  which 
Lincoln  appreciated  —  and  gently  encouraged. 
Also,  there  is  infinite  shrewd  insight  in  Welles's 
remark  that  if  Lincoln  had  written  one  of  Seward's 
ill-judged  letters,  "he  would  not  have  hesitated  a 
moment  to  retrace  his  steps  and  correct  it;  but 
that  is  the  difference  between  Abraham  Lincoln 
and  William  H.  Seward."  35  We  must  not  ask  too 
much  of  humanity. 

Yet  Welles  records  elsewhere  Seward's  admir- 
able confession,  after  his  views  as  to  Sumter  had 
been  rejected,  that  "old  as  he  was,  he  had  learned 
a  lesson  from  this  affair,  and  that  was,  he  had 
better  attend  to  his  own  business  and  confine  his 
labors  to  his  own  department."  36  He  did  not  learn 
the  lesson.  Who  of  us  ever  does?  So  long  as  the 
war  lasted,  he  showed  more  or  less  disposition  to 
advise  about  the  affairs  of  others.  But  he  did  this, 
not  as  a  meddlesome  busybody,  though  Welles 
often  thought  so,  but  from  an  intense  and  passion- 
ate zeal  for  the  triumph  of  the  cause,  just  as  a 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  213 

similar  zeal,  mingled  perchance  with  a  little  natural 
delight  in  the  exercise  of  power,  led  to  his  appar- 
ently harsh  treatment  of  the  political  prisoners 
who  came  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  State 
Department. 

The  same  enthusiastic  devotion  to  the  Union 
that  manifested  itself  in  domestic  affairs,  showed 
in  Se ward's  conduct  of  his.  special  field  of  foreign 
relations.  At  first,  indeed,  it  does  not  appear  that 
the  enthusiasm  was  always  guided  by  discretion. 
The  sense  of  power  in  controlling  the  intercourse 
of  the  country  with  all  the  great  nations  of  the 
world  produced  a  sort  of  intoxication  which  showed 
itself  in  words  and  deeds  not  wholly  appropriate. 
The  picture  given  by  Russell  at  the  very  beginning 
of  the  war  is  as  unfavorable  as  it  is  vivid:  "A 
subtle,  quick  man,  rejoicing  in  power,  given  to 
perorate,  bursting  with  the  importance  of  state 
mysteries  and  with  the  dignity  of  directing  the 
foreign  policy  of  the  greatest  country  —  as  all 
Americans  think  —  in  the  world."  37  Seward  him- 
self denied  having  uttered,  even  jocosely,  the 
threat  quoted  by  the  Duke  of  Newcastle,  that  he 
would  soon  be  Secretary  of  State  and  it  would 
then  be  his  duty  to  insult  England.  But  no  one 
can  question  the  authenticity  of  Lord  Lyon's,  the 
English  ambassador's,  account  of  the  scene  at  his 
table,  when,  finding  that  Seward  "was  getting 
more  and  more  violent  and  noisy,  and  saying 
things  which  it  would  be  more  convenient  for  me 


214  UNION  PORTRAITS 

not  to  have  heard,  I  took  a  natural  opportunity, 
as  host,  to  speak  to  some  of  the  ladies  in  the 
room."  38 

But  as  time  went  on,  this  effervescence,  after  a!3 
rather  superficial,  quieted,  and  the  Secretary  ap- 
plied his  keen  intellect  and  his  vast  industry  more 
and  more  skillfully  to  the  service  of  his  country. 
His  conduct  of  the  Trent  affair,  involving  the  re- 
lease of  the  commissioners  sent  by  the  Confederacy 
to  England,  who  had  been  taken  by  Captain 
Wilkes,  though  perhaps  rather  on  the  level  of  the 
clever  advocate  than  of  the  great  statesman,  was 
deft,  patriotic,  and  eminently  successful.  And  his 
letters  and  instructions  to  ministers  abroad,  while 
sometimes  verbose  and  not  always  free  from  errors 
of  judgment,  were  framed  on  broad  and  definite 
lines  of  policy  and  were  unquestionably  of  very 
great  value  in  preserving  the  friendships  and 
averting  the  enmities  which  were  both  so  closely 
connected  with  the  preservation  of  the  Union. 
There  is  much  to  justify  Bigelow's  remark  that 
of  all  the  departments  of  Government  during  the 
war,  that  of  State  was  the  only  one  "the  conduct 
of  which  was  never  seriously  assailed  by  Congress, 
by  the  press,  or  by  the  public."  39  And  this  was 
wholly  the  result  of  Seward's  management. 

Perhaps  the  two  concrete  achievements  that 
best  illustrate  Seward's  diplomatic  success  are  the 
expulsion  of  the  French  from  Mexico  and  the  ac- 
quisition of  Alaska.  In  regard  to  Mexico,  how  ad- 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD 

mirable,  in  a  statesman  accused  of  undue  bluster, 
is  the  letter  to  Bigelow  making  clear  the  neces- 
sity of  tact  and  conciliation  while  our  own  struggle 
lasted.  "  I  regret  that  you  think  my  course  towards 
the  French  Government  is  too  conciliatory  and 
courteous.  .  .  .  We  have  compromised  nothing, 
surrendered  nothing,  and  I  do  not  propose  to  sur- 
render anything.  But  why  should  we  gasconade 
about  Mexico  when  we  are  in  a  struggle  for  our 
own  life?"  *°  Then,  when  the  war  was  over,  it  was 
made  perfectly  evident  to  France  that  there  was 
no  place  for  her  in  Mexico  any  longer;  yet  this 
also  was  done  with  entire  consideration  and  cour- 
tesy. 

The  Mexican  affair  was  negative.  The  purchase 
of  Alaska  was  a  piece  of  constructive  statesman- 
ship, broadly  conceived  and  energetically  carried 
out.  Who  will  say,  after  the  developments  of  the 
last  twenty  years,  that  it  was  not  as  felicitous  as 
it  was  enterprising? 

Also,  the  Alaskan  purchase,  important  as  it  was, 
was  only  a  detail  in  Seward's  conception  of  the 
needs,  the  possibilities,  and  the  future  develop- 
ment of  America.  From  his  earliest  activity  in 
politics  he  looked  forward,  far  forward,  and  re- 
fused to  be  limited  by  the  petty  effort  of  the 
passing  hour.  It  was  this  sense  of  the  vast  mean- 
ing of  American  democracy  that  made  him  utterly 
incredulous  of  secession  as  a  practical  issue  and  for- 
ever insistent  on  the  mighty,  cumulative  march  of 


216  UNION  PORTRAITS 

progress.  Canada  must  be  ours.  Mexico  must  be 
ours.  In  thirty  years,  he  said,  Mexico  City  will  be 
the  capital  of  the  United  States.41  Railroads?  Of 
course  we  must  have  railroads!  Canals?  Of  course 
we  must  have  canals!  Commerce?  Of  course  we 
must  have  commerce!  Every  day  we  must  be  busy 
thinking  and  contriving  to  do  our  part  toward  the 
vast  consummation  which  the  Creator  has  planned 
for  these  great,  grov/ing,  independent  States. 

So,  as  he  was  a  cheerful  person  to  have  in  the 
house,  he  was  also  a  cheerful  person  to  have  in  the 
country.  When  others  were  downcast  and  de- 
spairing, he  was  hopeful,  and  while  no  doubt  such 
confidence  might  tend  to  delusion  and  deception 
and  undeception,  there  were  plenty  to  look  at  the 
dark  side  and  provide  for  it  without  him.  He  did 
not  think  the  war  would  come,  he  did  not  think 
it  would  last,  he  was  sure  it  could  have  but  one 
result  if  it  did  last,  and  he  was  inclined  to  believe 
that  it  was  a  natural  stage  of  development  which 
might  not  impossibly  have  beneficial  consequences. 

Nor  was  his  optimism  wholly  of  the  comfortable 
sort  which  has  no  anxiety  about  the  misfortunes 
of  others,  but  is  doubly  solicitous  about  its  own. 
When  Bigelow  warned  him,  early  in  the  war,  of  the 
danger  of  assassination,  which  was  so  near  being 
fatal  to  him  at  the  time  when  it  annihilated  Lin- 
coln, his  buoyant  answer  was,  "Assassination  is 
not  an  American  practice  or  habit,  and  one  so 
vicious  and  so  desperate  cannot  be  engrafted  into 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  217 

our  political  system.  This  conviction  of  mine  has 
steadily  gained  strength  since  the  Civil  War  began. 
Every  day's  experience  confirms  it."  42 

Also,  the  cheerfulness  was  not  a  mere  matter  of 
temperament,  not  merely  the  smooth  and  quiet 
utterance  of  a  spirit  always  tranquil  and  content. 
One  most  remarkable  passage,  written  to  his 
daughter,  in  August,  1862;  after  McClellan's  mis- 
fortunes, shows  him  deeply  oppressed  by  the  bur- 
den of  others'  depression  and  complaint:  "My 
table  groans,  and  my  heart  sinks,  under  the  weight 
of  complaints  that  I  can  put  to  no  practicable  use. 
If  I  should  let  a  shade  of  this  popular  despondency 
fall  upon  a  despatch,  or  even  rest  upon  my  own 
countenance,  there  would  be  black  despair  through- 
out the  whole  country."  43  Perhaps  the  illumina- 
tion of  the  whole  country  did  not  so  absolutely 
depend  upon  the  light  of  his  countenance  as  he 
supposed,  but  much  of  it  did.  In  any  case,  so 
believing,  the  effort  he  made  was  admirably  and 
nobly  patriotic,  and  the  ringing,  resounding  assur- 
ance that  echoes  through  all  his  foreign  correspond- 
ence was  unquestionably  of  the  very  highest  value 
to  his  cause. 

It  was  not  only  in  ardent  patriotic  activity  that 
Seward  differed  from  the  common  type  of  politi- 
cian to  which  the  first  part  of  our  study  might 
seem  to  assimilate  him.  In  financial  matters  he 
was  absolutely  honest.  This  may  not  have  been 
true  of  all  his  associates  and  supporters.  With 


218  UNION  PORTRAITS 

his  easy-going  light-heartedness,  he  accepted  the 
political  methods  common  in  his  day,  especially 
among  men  like  Weed,  and  regarded  the  lobbyist 
and  the  office-seeker  with  far  too  much  good- 
nature. But  he  boasted,  and  justly  boasted,  that 
so  far  from  making  anything  out  of  politics  him- 
self, directly  or  indirectly,  he  had  always  spent 
well  beyond  his  official  salary. 

Nor  was  this  made  easy  by  any  unlimited  supply 
of  private  means.  On  the  contrary,  he  was  often 
in  financial  trouble,  and  he  neither  liked  nor 
understood  the  shrewd  frugal  management  which 
is  so  helpful  to  the  maintenance  of  honesty  in 
high  places.  On  one  occasion,  in  the  height  of  his 
career,  he  writes:  "All  excesses  leave  a  train  of 
penances.  Those  Rathbone  notes  fall  due  about 
this  time.  I  am  ashamed  to  confess  that  as  to 
one  of  them  I  don't  know  when  or  where,  any 
more  than  I  can  tell  how,  it  is  to  be  paid." 44  A 
statesman  in  such  a  position  as  that  is  driving 
very  near  to  a  dangerous  abyss.  Too  many  fall  in. 
Seward  did  not.  And  as  Seward  was  no  politician 
in  money  matters,  so  he  was  perfectly  ready  to 
stand  up  against  popular  enthusiasm  and  to  sacri- 
fice personal  advantage,  when  duty  or  humanity 
seemed  to  demand  it.  The  most  striking  instance 
of  this  in  his  legal  practice  is  his  defense  of  the 
negro  murderer,  Freeman,  when  the  whole  com- 
munity was  howling  for  his  punishment.  Seward 
took  the  case,  in  defiance  of  public  opinion,  and 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  219 

demonstrated  the  wretch's  irresponsibility  so  com- 
pletely that  the  jury  was  obliged  to  acquit  him. 

In  public  life,  also,  Seward  did  not  hesitate  a 
moment  to  support  an  unpopular  cause.  When 
the  Catholics  were  a  comparatively  small  minority 
and  were  in  disfavor,  he,  as  Governor  of  New  York, 
recommended  "The  establishment  of  schools  in 
which  they  may  be  instructed  by  teachers  speak- 
ing the  same  language  and  professing  the  same 
faith."  45  He  was  a  consistent  and  energetic  advo- 
cate of  unlimited  immigration,  and  his  readiness 
to  help  the  ignorant  and  the  oppressed,  even  when 
such  action  seemed  contrary  to  the  party  outcries 
of  the  hour,  was  sufficiently  marked  to  elicit  from 
Charles  Francis  Adams,  in  his  enthusiastic  eulogy, 
the  declaration,  "Very  few  public  men  in  our  his- 
tory can  be  cited  who  have  shown  so  much  indif- 
ference, in  running  directly  counter  to  the  popular 
passions  when  highly  excited,  as  he  did."  46 

Enemies  of  Seward,  and  some  of  his  warm 
friends,  have  pointed  out  that  in  all  these  in- 
stances of  apparent  sacrifice  there  was,  or  might 
have  been,  some  clever  perception  of  future  politi- 
cal advantage.  But  it  is  difficult  to  find  any  such 
selfish  motive  in  the  broad  and  patriotic  attitude 
which  he  adopted  after  his  loss  of  the  presidential 
nomination  in  1860.  There  was  no  sulking,  no 
repining,  just  a  steady  resolve  to  make  the  best 
of  it  and,  above  all,  to  go  on  serving  the  country. 
Even  finer  is  the  complete  abandonment,  from 


220  UNION  PORTRAITS 

that  time,  of  the  ambition  for  the  Presidency. 
Other  supporters  of  Lincoln  hoped  and  schemed 
to  succeed  him.  Seward  was  the  loyal,  earnest 
Secretary  of  State  and  that  only,  or,  if  he  as- 
pired to  be  more,  it  was  that  he  might  make  the 
Lincoln  Government  more  efficient  and  more  suc- 
cessful. 

ill 

It  is  by  this  time  very  evident  that  Seward  was 
a  complex  personage.  Mr.  Rhodes  confesses  him- 
self puzzled  by  some  of  these  apparent  inconsist- 
encies. He  says  of  one  case,  "Whether  the  course 
of  Seward  was  dictated  by  a  noble  independence 
of  party  trammels,  or  whether  he  was  trimming 
to  catch  the  moderate  element  among  the  Repub- 
licans and  Democrats  at  the  North,  it  seems  im- 
possible to  decide/'  47  Mr.  Bancroft,  in  his  ad- 
mirable biography,  one  of  the  very  best  dealing 
with  the  Civil  War,  is  driven  to  the  conception  of 
two  distinct  Sewards,  living  d  la  Jekyll  and  Hyde, 
in  the  same  body,  one  the  admirer  and  imitator 
of  such  an  ideal  statesman  as  John  Quincy  Adams, 
the  other  the  close  associate  and,  if  not  the  tool, 
at  least  the  confederate  of  astute  politicians  like 
Thurlow  Weed.48 

There  is,  I  think,  a  theory  which,  although  we 
should  not  emphasize  it  too  much,  will  help  us  to 
reconcile  all  these  inconsistencies.  Let  us  admit 
at  once  that  Seward's  temperament  was  not  that 


WILLIAM  HENEY  SEWAKD 

of  a  great  statesman.  His  career  requires  too  much 
apology.  When  you  have  explained  away  half  of 
him,  what  is  left  may  have  distinct  claims  to 
greatness.  But  put  him  beside  a  really  big  man, 
with  square  shoulders,  a  square  head,  and  a  square 
heart,  and  he  shrivels.  Why,  his  face  is  incom- 
patible with  greatness.  All  the  portraits  I  have 
seen  of  him,  but  one,  give  an  impression  of  wizened 
inadequacy.  And  even  that  one  suggests  a  soul 
not  fitted  for  the  highest  executive  success. 

No,  Seward's  temperament  was  essentially  that 
of  an  artist,  and,  without  forcing  the  argument 
too  far,  this  will  explain  for  us  a  great  many  of  the 
secrets  of  his  brilliant  and  complicated  career.  It 
is  curious  how  much  that  is  puzzling  slips  into  its 
true  place  when  viewed  in  this  light,  curious  how 
often  Seward  himself  directly  or  indirectly  indi- 
cates this  clue  to  the  vagaries  of  his  thought.  It 
was  the  artist  in  him  that  quivered  at  the  coming 
of  crocuses  and  tulips  and  longed  to  spend  hours 
watching  the  roses  in  luxuriant  bloom.49  It  was 
the  artist,  above  all,  that  summed  up  his  own 
instincts  in  the  following  comment:  "Few  people 
are  capable  of  an  artistic  conception  about  any- 
thing. Of  the  multitude  whose  daily  occupation  is 
with  our  dinner,  how  few  ever  attain  to  a  proper 
notion  of  how  to  cook  it."  50  To  prepare  the  great 
concoction  of  American  history  according  to  an 
artistic  recipe,  and  to  be  head  chef  in  the  process, 
that  was  the  instinctive  longing  of  William  H. 


222  UNION  PORTRAITS 

Seward.  And  this  is  as  true  of  his  old  age  in  Re- 
construction days  as  it  was  of  his  buoyant  youth, 
when  he  first  sported  with  the  passions  of  anti- 
masonry. 

He  was  an  artist  in  words.  He  was  not  a  great 
man  of  letters  and  never  could  have  been.  He 
was  too  diffuse;  in  fact,  often  thought  more  about 
the  words  than  about  the  idea  they  carried  with 
them.  But  from  his  college  days,  when  he  wrote 
a  thesis  entitled,  "Virtue  is  the  best  of  all  the 
Vices/'  he  had  the  real  literary  man's  love  for 
the  jingle  and  clatter  and  sparkle  and  resonance 
of  those  dainty  and  dangerous  instruments  which 
were  given  us  to  conceal  our  thoughts.  All  his 
speeches  are  entertaining  reading,  and  that  is  a 
great  deal  to  say  of  a  dead  speech.  After  going 
through  fifteen  volumes  of  Sumner's  orations,  till 
one  hates  the  name  of  oratory,  one  can  take  up 
any  speech  of  Seward's  and  be  really  diverted. 
There  is  plenty  of  verbiage,  plenty  of  platitude. 
But  he  knows  it  just  as  well  as  you  do,  and  does 
not  in  the  least  care;  in  fact,  serves  it  out  on  pur- 
pose. And  you  enjoy  cunning  periods  like  the 
following,  because  you  feel  how  exceedingly  he 
enjoys  them:  "If  I  fall  here,  let  no  kinsman  or 
friend  remove  my  dust  to  a  more  hospitable  grave. 
Let  it  be  buried  under  the  pavements  of  the 
Avenue,  and  let  the  chariot  wheels  of  those  who 
have  destroyed  the  liberties  of  my  country  rattle 
over  my  bones  until  a  more  heroic  and  worthy 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  223 

generation  shall  recall  that  country  to  life,  liberty, 
and  independence."  51  Now,  is  n't  that  fun? 

He  was  an  artist  in  political  management  and 
this  explains  many  things  he  did  and  many  things 
he  did  not  do.  It  has  been  denied  as  well  as  as- 
serted that  he  called  politics  "a  harmless  game  for 
power,"  but  much  in  his  attitude  suggests  the 
phrase.  While  he  would  have  abhorred  the  morals, 
whether  political  or  general,  of  Talleyrand  and 
Metternich,  there  are  indications  that  he  admired 
their  tact,  their  patience,  their  self-control,  and 
their  indifference.  It  was  the  artist  who  remarked 
naively,  "I  am  disgusted  with  politics,  yet  how 
long  will  I  remain  so?"  52  It  was  the  artist  who 
is  said  to  have  modeled  the  little  incident  about 
Benjamin  and  the  cigar,  above  referred  to,  on  a 
similar  passage  between  Van  Buren  and  Clay.  It 
was  the  artist  who  recounted,  as  vividly  as  a 
scene  in  a  comedy,  the  conversation  between  him- 
self, Weed,  and  Whittlesey,  which  resulted  in 
Seward's  nomination  for  Governor.  It  was  the 
artist,  finally,  who  luxuriated  in  Sterne,  the  most 
thoroughly  artificial  of  literary  men,  and  could 
cite  him  as  follows:  "Sterne  is  the  only  philosopher 
who  resolves  for  me  what  I  feel  to  be  my  art  of 
living.  'We  get  forward  in  the  world/  says  he, 
'not  so  much  by  doing  services  as  by  receiving 
them/  "  53  He  might  have  found  even  more  appli- 
cation in  another  bit  of  Shandyism,  when  Sterne 
shows  his  compassionate  tenderness  by  feeding  the 


UNION  PORTRAITS 

starved  ass,  but  at  the  same  time  murmurs,  "At 
this  moment  that  I  am  telling  it,  my  heart  smites 
me,  that  there  was  more  of  pleasantry  in  the  con- 
ceit of  seeing  how  an  ass  would  eat  a  macaroon  — 
than  of  benevolence  in  giving  him  one,  which 
presided  in  the  act/'  All  his  life  Seward  felt  that 
devouring  curiosity  to  see  how  the  constituent  ass 
would  munch  the  political  macaroon. 

This  sense  of  detachment,  of  watching  the  game, 
of  amusement  at  the  antics  of  the  puppets  and 
their  insignificance,  including  his  own,  is  ever  pres- 
ent and  most  characteristic.  Mr.  Bancroft  justly 
points  out  that  Seward  on  himself  is  always  delight- 
ful. It  is  for  this  reason,  because  he  surveyed 
himself  as  one  among  the  other  asses  and  laughed 
at  his  own  contortions  with  that  macaroon.  He  is 
annoyed  with  himself,  ashamed  of  himself,  sur- 
prised at  himself,  but  as  if  he  were  somebody  else. 
He  told  Bigelow  that  "He  had  been  astonished  to 
find  how  much  he  had  done  since  he  had  been  in 
public  life  and  how  well  some  things  had  been  done 
which  he  had  entirely  forgotten/'  54  It  was  the 
same  detachment  which  led  him  to  smile  at  the 
outrageous  treatment  of  Motley,  in  1867,  and  to 
imply  calmly  to  Bigelow  that  he  had  to  sacrifice 
Motley  to  save  himself.55 

This  detached,  remote  attitude  is  that  of  the 
humorist,  and  Seward  was  a  humorist  all  his  life. 
He  himself  denied  that  Lincoln  was  and  in  a  sense 
justly.  Lincoln,  he  said,  was  a  grave  and  serious 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  225 

man  who  told  his  stories  only  to  make  a  point.56 
He  might  have  said,  further,  that  to  the  Lincoln  of 
the  war,  as  to  the  Shakespeare  of  the  tragic  period, 
comedy  was  merely  a  relief  in  the  terrible  tragedy 
of  life.  To  Seward  there  was  no  tragedy  of  life. 
The  most  strenuous  effort,  the  most  ardent  hope, 
were  all  a  part  of  the  game,  and  even  suffering 
was  insignificant  compared  with  eternity.  There- 
fore, in  his  speech  and  in  his  thought,  there  was 
always  the  light  and  dainty  play  of  humorous 
fancy,  as  when  he  ends  a  letter  to  Weed,  summing 
up  all  his  semi-serious  woes  and  difficulties,  "With 
love  to  Harriet,  I  am  ever  your  unfortunate  friend 
who  has  faith  in  everybody  and  enjoys  the  con- 
fidence of  nobody/'  57 

Also,  he  was  capable  of  keen  wit.  To  a  lady 
who  was  begging  for  military  information  he  said, 
"Madam,  if  I  did  not  know,  I  would  tell  you."58 
When  Piatt  had  assisted  him  to  pass  the  guard  at 
the  War  Department  —  Stanton's  War  Depart- 
ment —  by  making  him  known  to  the  sentinel,  and 
in  turn  himself  asked  to  be  passed  through  the 
same  strait  gate,  in  the  name  of  common  polite- 
ness, Seward  remarked,  "Young  man,  the  polite- 
ness of  this  Department  is  not  common."59 

With  the  humor  and  the  detachment  went  also 
the  vanity  of  at  least  a  certain  type  of  artist.  It 
need  hardly  be  said  that  this  is  not  the  highest 
type.  Seward  did  not  represent  the  highest  type. 
The  defect  obviously  springs  from  not  surveying 


UNION  PORTRAITS 

one's  self  with  quite  the  same  complete  detach- 
ment as  one  bestows  upon  the  rest  of  the  world. 
Whatever  the  cause,  a  certain  vanity,  at  times 
vexatious,  is  undeniable  in  Seward.  "He  had  a 
canine  appetite  for  praise/'  says  Bigelow,60  quot- 
ing Jefferson  on  Lafayette.  And  the  astute  Lord 
Lyons  comments  patronizingly:  "He  has,  besides, 
so  much  more  vanity,  personal  and  national,  than 
tact,  that  he  seldom  makes  a  favorable  impression 
at  first.  When  one  comes  really  to  know  him, 
one  is  surprised  to  find  much  to  esteem  and  even 
to  like  in  him."  61 

This  vanity  showed  both  in  candid  statement  of 
the  Secretary's  indisputable  merits  and  in  a  cer- 
tain amount  of  delusion  as  to  merits  and  abilities 
which  he  did  not  possess.  It  accounts  for  his  being 
"intoxicated  with  power/'  as  a  good  observer 
expresses  it,  for  his  long-cherished  belief  that  he 
could  run  and  was  running  the  whole  Government 
of  Lincoln,  for  many  remarks  and  observations 
almost  equal  to  the  following:  "Only  the  sooth- 
ing words  which  I  have  spoken  have  saved  us  and 
carried  us  along  so  far."  62  It  finds,  perhaps,  its 
most  delightful  manifestation  in  the  amplified  rem- 
iniscence of  a  well-known  saying  of  Caesar,  "I 
always  held  on  to  my  country  home  at  Auburn, 
because,  come  what  might,  there  I  could  always 
be  sure  of  ranking  with  the  first.  I  would  not  live 
in  New  York  City  because  there  one  becomes 
cheap.  You  are  lost  in  the  crowd.  By  keeping 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  227 

outside  of  the  city  I  was  always  a  lion  in  the  city. 
I  patronized  instead  of  being  patronized."  63 

As  this  quotation  shows,  such  vanity  as  Seward's 
—  and  the  same  is  true  of  the  far  greater  vanity 
of  Cicero  —  is  not  at  all  incompatible  with  keen 
self-analysis.  Indeed,  the  two  naturally  occur  to- 
gether. It  is  precisely  because  one  is  so  sensible 
of  one's  own  defects  that  one  does  not  wish  others 
to  see  them.  Such  vanity  is  even  consonant  with 
a  fine  humility.  Above  all,  it  often  accompanies  a 
quite  adorable  simplicity  and  candor,  as  suggested 
by  the  remark  of  one  of  Meilhac  and  Halevy's 
characters,  who  was  accused  of  coquetry  because 
he  looked  in  the  glass.  "Oh,  no,  it  is  n't  coquetry 
at  all.  It  is  just  simply  that  it  gives  me  great 
pleasure  to  look  at  myself." 

Finally,  the  most  attractive  and  most  service- 
able element  of  the  artist  in  Seward  was  the  imagi- 
native outlook,  which  I  have  indicated  earlier  in 
this  study.  Others  about  him  were  more  or  less 
opportunist,  absorbed  in  the  immediate  political 
necessity  of  the  hour.  From  his  earliest  manhood 
he  looked  far  ahead  into  the  immense  regions  of 
American  possibility  and  guided  his  course  steadily 
by  what  he  saw  there.  He  was  not  a  profound 
thinker  in  any  line.  In  religion  he  moved  always 
in  the  vague  limbo  in  which  many  of  us  nowadays 
pass  our  spiritual  lives.  In  philosophy  and  art  he 
seldom  went  beyond  conventionalities.  His  force 
in  this  line  is  well  shown  by  Mr.  Bancroft's  excel- 


UNION  PORTRAITS 

lent  observation  that  "he  had  a  philosophical 
theory  for  everything  he  wished  to  believe."  64 
But  he  had  the  seer's  enthusiasm  and  the  seer's 
hope.  The  present,  the  result  actually  achieved, 
however  great,  was  never  enough  for  him.  A  new 
purpose,  a  new  dream,  a  new  ideal,  perpetually 
spurred  him  onward;  and  in  this  nervous  restless- 
ness he  was  thoroughly  American  and  of  immense 
service  to  America.  You  could  not  fatigue  him. 
You  could  not  disgust  him.  Hear  with  what  a 
clamorous  appeal  he  stirs  the  sloth  of  his  fellows 
in  the  dead  atmosphere  of  routine  legislation:  "I 
see  rising  before  me  hundreds  of  thousands,  mil- 
lions, even  tens  of  millions,  of  my  countrymen, 
receiving  their  fortunes  and  fates,  as  they  are  being 
shaped  by  the  action  of  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  in  this  hour  of  languor,  at  the  close  of  a 
weary  day,  near  the  end  of  a  protracted  and  tedious 
session."  65  One  phrase  sums  up  as  well  as  any 
this  splendid,  energetic,  triumphant,  imaginative 
optimism,  which  is  perhaps  Seward's  greatest  merit 
and  surest  claim  to  the  affection  of  posterity. 
"The  improvability  of  our  race  is  without  limit."  66 
When  the  immediate  prospect  looks  black  and 
hopeless,  it  is  well  to  stimulate  our  courage  with 
that  watchword,  which  one  statesman  at  least  be- 
lieved in,  "The  improvability  of  our  race  is  with- 
out limit." 

While  not  insisting  too  strongly,  I  believe  that 
this  explanation  of  the  artist's  temperament  is  the 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD  229 

best  clue  to  all  the  spiritual  problems  affecting 
Seward.  The  point  is  interesting  because  it  differ- 
entiates him  from  almost  all  of  his  political  con- 
temporaries, who  were  workers,  practical  men,  too 
busy  with  the  battle  going  on  about  them  to  get 
out  of  it  and  survey  it  as  a  spectacle  merely. 

However  we  view  him,  he  was  a  many-sided, 
many-colored,  many-featured,  most  fascinating 
spirit,  whom  I  part  from  with  the  greatest  regret. 
Yet  I  confess  that,  after  all,  what  comes  closest  to 
me  in  regard  to  him  is  Lincoln,  rolling  over  in  his 
berth  and  murmuring  sleepily,  "Seward,  you  go 
out  and  repeat  some  of  your  poetry  to  the  people/' 


VIII 
CHARLES  SUMNER 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Boston,  January  6,  1811. 

Admitted  to  Boston  Latin  School,  August,  1821. 

Graduated,  Harvard,  1830. 

Entered  Law  School,  1831. 

Admitted  to  bar,  1834. 

Traveled  in  Europe,  1837-1840. 

Law  and  general  public  activity,  1840-51. 

First  public  speech,  July  4,  1845. 

Entered  Senate,  1851. 

Assaulted  by  Brooks,  May  22,  1856. 

Recovering,  1856-60. 

Active  in  Senate,  1860-74. 

Married  Mrs.  Hooper,  October  17,  1866. 

Parted  from  wife,  June,  1867. 

Removed  from  chairmanship  of  Foreign  Affairs  Committee, 

1871. 
Died,  March  11, 1874. 


VIII 

CHARLES   SUMNER 
I 

SUMNER  had  a  magnificent  tongue  and  one  idea, 
the  abolition  of  slavery.  If  it  be  suggested  that 
this  is  limiting  his  stock  of  ideas  unduly,  it  may 
be  answered  that  even  so  he  had  one  more  than  a 
good  many  of  us.  He  himself  resented  such  limi- 
tation with  spirit:  "There  is  sometimes  a  warning 
against  men  of  one  idea,  with  a  finger-point  at 
myself.  Here  I  meet  my  accusers  face  to  face. 
What  duty  have  I  failed  to  perform?  Let  it  be 
specified."  l  There  is,  perhaps,  a  slight  confusion 
in  this  passage,  not  unnatural  in  dealing  with  an 
unfamiliar  subject. 

Summer's  admirers  also  protest  strongly  that  he 
had  a  wealth  of  ideas.  It  is  true  that  even  politi- 
cally speaking  some  subjects  besides  slavery  are 
dealt  with  in  the  fifteen- volumed  collection  of  his 
works.  He  spoke  at  length  on  the  peace  of  the 
world,  also  more  specifically  on  questions  of  for- 
eign policy,  on  copyright  and  the  tariff  on  books, 
on  financial  questions  after  the  war.  And  he  ac- 
cumulated and  poured  forth  a  mass  of  historical 
erudition  on  the  purchase  of  Alaska. 

If  enormous  contact  with  print  makes  a  man  of 


234  UNION  PORTRAITS 

ideas,  few  have  been  better  furnished  than  Sumner. 
He  read  almost  from  his  cradle,  with  zeal  and 
industry  and  delight.  In  college  he  did  not  always 
study,  but  he  read.  In  preparing  for  his  law  career, 
he  read  twice  as  much  law  as  any  one  else  and  four 
times  as  much  that  was  not  law.  During  his  years 
abroad,  in  the  thirties,  he  read  all  authors  in  all 
languages.  When  he  returned  and  practiced  law, 
—  rather  unsuccessfully,  —  he  still  read.  He  ob- 
jected to  being  in  the  Senate  because  it  interfered 
with  his  reading,  yet  he  probably  read  more  than 
any  other  five  Senators.  When  he  was  recovering 
from  the  fierce  Southern  bludgeon  of  Brooks,  he 
wrote  to  Longfellow  (March,  1859),  in  most  char- 
acteristic words:  "Lying  on  my  back,  books  have 
been  my  great  solace.  I  have  read  furiously  — 
like  the  old  Bishop  of  Avranches,  flos  episcoporum; 
or  Felton;  or  the  Abbe  Morellet,  in  the  Bastille;  or 
Scaliger."  2  His  idea  of  heaven  was  that  of  Gray, 
reading,  reading,  reading. 

In  this  immense  faculty  of  ocular  absorption 
and  also  of  retaining  what  was  absorbed,  he  sug- 
gests Macaulay,  and  it  is  pretty  to  see  how  all 
Sumner  speaks  in  the  conversation  with  A.  B. 
Johnson  about  the  great  English  historian.3  Sum- 
ner had  known  Macaulay  well  and  with  his  own 
noble  candor  recognizes  the  Englishman's  huge 
capacity  of  acquisition.  At  the  same  time,  you 
cannot  fail  to  be  impressed  with  the  fact  that  one 
Sumner  had  read  a  little  something  too. 


CHARLES  SUMNER  235 

And,  like  Macaulay's,  Sumner's  information  was 
singularly  complete  in  unexpected  regions.  When 
one  of  Lady  Holland's  guests  introduced  the  sub- 
ject of  dolls,  Macaulay  told  all  there  was  to  know 
about  them  from  the  Romans  down,  till  the  hostess 
ordered  him  to  change  the  subject.  So  Sumner 
could  discourse  exhaustively  on  old  lace,  or  pot- 
tery, or  engravings,  was  equally  at  home  with 
jewels,  or  trees,  or  the  breeding  of  horned  cattle. 

Nevertheless,  some  persons  consider  that  even 
Macaulay  had  more  gift  at  expressing  ideas  than 
at  originating  them.  And  this  was  certainly  true 
of  Sumner.  We  need  not  accept  in  full  the  harsh 
dictum  of  Carlyle,  who  detested  Sumner's  politics: 
"The  most  completely  nothin'  of  a  mon  that  ever 
crossed  my  threshold,  —  naught  whatsoever  in  him 
or  of  him  but  wind  and  vanity/'  4  Nor  even  the 
hardly  more  amiable  one  of  Lord  Morley,  in  his 
"Life  of  Gladstone/'  that  Sumner  was  "too  often 
the  slave  of  words  when  he  thought  he  was  their 
master."5  A  similar  personal  antipathy  is  obvious 
in  the  judgment  of  the  shrewd  and  critical  Godkin, 
written  in  1867:  "Did  you  see  poor  Sumner 's  last 
'bill  and  resolutions'?  What  a  pitiable  spectacle! 
Was  there  ever  anything  in  the  man,  and  if  so, 
what  has  become  of  it?  I  felt  so  grateful  to  Fes- 
senden,  ungentlemanly  though  he  was,  for  sticking 
his  pin  into  the  bladder."  6  But  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted by  even  the  impartial  observer  that  Sum- 
ner's  thought  and  reflection  were  wholly  out  of 


236  UNION  PORTRAITS 

proportion  to  his  immense  reading,  swamped  by 
it,  perhaps. 

Mr.  Storey,  in  his  admirably  sympathetic  biog- 
raphy, says  that  the  Senator  "treated  his  mind  as 
a  reservoir  and  into  it  steadily  pumped  learning 
of  every  kind/'7  It  is  interesting  to  note  that 
Sumner  himself,  in  one  of  those  moments  of  self- 
illumination  which  come  to  every  man,  no  matter 
how  blind  he  may  be  to  his  own  demerits,  used 
the  same  figure,  remarking  to  Colonel  Higginson, 
"These  people  forget  that  I  am  a  cistern,  not  a 
fountain,  and  require  time  to  fill  up."8  A  cistern 
he  was,  without  doubt,  though  one  of  most  extra- 
ordinary capacity. 

There  are,  however,  plenty  of  men  who  are  not 
thinkers,  but  more  than  make  up  for  the  defect 
by  richness  of  emotion  and  sensibility.  If  you 
probe  Sumner  beneath  the  faculty  of  speech,  you 
find  him  quite  as  much  lacking  in  this  respect  as 
in  intellectual  power.  Longfellow,  who  judged 
him  with  both  the  insight  and  the  discretion  of 
exquisite  friendship,  speaks  of  him  as  "a  colossus 
holding  his  burning  heart  in  his  hand,  to  light  up 
the  sea  of  life."  9  But  if  he  did  illuminate  that 
treacherous  sea,  it  was  rather  by  the  white  incan- 
descence of  moral  purpose.  I  cannot  find  any  evi- 
dence that  his  heart  ever  burned.  His  father  is 
described  as  a  man  of  singular  self-possession,  his 
mother  as  a  woman  of  equable,  even  imperturb- 
able, temper.  Charles  never  belied  his  origin. 


CHARLES  SUMNER  237 

Take  art.  He  pursued  art,  in  all  its  forms,  — 
poetry,  painting,  music,  —  all  his  life,  with  insa- 
tiable curiosity.  He  collected  rare  books,  engrav- 
ings, bric-a-brac,  with  untiring  zeal.  He  collected 
these  things  intelligently  and  systematically.  He 
could  talk  of  them  by  the  hour  and  write  of  them 
by  the  yard.  I  find  no  indication  that  he  was  ever 
wrapt  or  transported  by  them.  His  devoted  friend, 
W.  W.  Story,  says,  "The  higher  flights  of  the 
imagination,  or  the  rapid  ranges  of  fancy,  were 
above  him/'  10  and  elsewhere,  "his  judgment  as 
to  a  work  of  art  was  poor;  his  sense  of  art  very 
limited,  though  he  ever  strove  to  cultivate  his 
taste  and  feeling  for  it."  n 

Take  nature.  There  is  hardly  a  sign  in  all  his 
vast  printed  writing  that  natural  beauty  existed, 
unless  in  a  quotation  for  ornamental  purposes. 
He  never  lived  in  the  country,  never  wanted  to. 
He  does,  indeed,  twice  repeat  the  phrase,  "Man's 
season  is  over;  but  God's  is  come."  12  It  is  a  good 
phrase.  But  man's  season  was  quite  enough  for 
him. 

If  a  heart  burns  with  anything,  it  burns  with 
love.  Did  Sumner's?  If  so,  there  is  no  record  of  it. 
At  fifty-five  he  married  a  young  widow;  but  the 
heart-burning  came  afterward.  In  his  youth  girls 
apparently  were  null  to  him.  He  did  not  even 
avoid  them.  But  he  would  turn  from  any  girl  at 
any  moment  to  any  man  who  could  assuage  his 
interrogatory  mania.  In  1859,  when  he  was  nearly 


238  UNION  PORTRAITS 

fifty,  he  and  Mr.  Bemis  discussed  "love,  including 
some  of  Sumner's  experiences."  13  But  this  seems 
rather  shadowy. 

In  his  talk  with  women  he  had  at  times  a  pecu- 
liar pedantry  which  is  pleasant  to  the  observer, 
but  must  have  been  overpowering  to  the  recipient. 
On  his  way  to  school,  at  a  tender  age,  he  used 
often  to  encounter  a  dainty  slip  of  virginity  and 
his  casual  greeting  was,  "Macte  virtute,"  grow  in 
grace.14  When  he  was  an  elderly  Senator  in  Wash- 
ington, a  young  lady,  just  entering  society,  eagerly 
confided  to  him  that  she  did  love  to  see  lions 
breaking  the  ice.  Sumner  remarked,  after  a  mo- 
ment's pause,  "Miss ,  in  the  country  where 

lions  live  there  is  no  ice."15  His  intervening  tri- 
umphant career  does  not  lack  similar  conversa- 
tional blossoms. 

Yet  women  sought  him  and  delighted  in  him, 
doubtless  because  of  the  well-known  charm  of  the 
unattainable.  W.  W.  Story  tells  of  repeated  bets 
with  the  most  fascinating  women  that  they  could 
not  long  engage  Sumner's  attention.  They  ac- 
cepted, and  sparkled,  and  shone,  quite  fruitlessly. 
Like  the  heroes  of  Ossian,  they  went  forth  to  the 
war,  but  they  always  fell.16 

And  this  is  the  best.  Sumner  himself  told  how 
one  day  he  wrote  a  love  letter  for  a  client  and 
so  outdid  the  client's  own  experience  that  he  was 
actually  moved  to  tears.  What  an  enviable  and 
golden  —  or  tinsel  —  mastery  of  words! 17 


CHARLES  SUMNER  £39 

By  painful  emotions  he  was  as  little  affected  as 
by  agreeable.  Fear  he  apparently  did  not  know. 
He  did  not  fear  obloquy.  He  did  not  fear  pain. 
He  did  not  fear  death.  Long  before  he  was  at- 
tacked in  the  Senate,  he  was  furiously  threatened. 
But  he  refused  all  precaution  and  all  protection. 
After  he  had  been  attacked,  when  the  danger  was 
renewed,  he  was  equally  indifferent  to  it.  And  his 
disregard  of  death  was  not  the  mere  buoyant  igno- 
rance of  perfect  health;  for  it  persisted  through 
a  tedious  illness  and  even  expressed  itself  in  a 
certain  reluctance  to  recovery. 

Nor  was  the  fear  of  death  subdued  by  any  posi- 
tive or  inspiring  religious  enthusiasm.  In  this 
field  as  elsewhere  Sumner  had  little  emotional 
experience  and  little  speculative  theory  to  induce 
it.  Grant's  harsh  gibe,  when  told  that  Sumner 
had  no  faith  in  the  Bible,  "No,  he  did  n't  write 
it/'18  may  be  neglected  —  though  appreciated. 
The  Senator  cherished  a  general,  wholesome,  opti- 
mistic belief  that  all  would  be  well,  and  his  strong 
moral  sense  sometimes  found  utterance  in  im- 
pressive religious  phraseology,  as  when  he  rebuked 
the  attitude  of  Gladstone  and  other  English  sup- 
porters of  the  South  by  saying  that  they  "were 
forgetting  God  who  will  not  be  forgotten."  19  But 
he  himself  wrote  in  youth,  "I  am  without  religious 
feeling."  20 

It  is  useless  to  attempt  to  embroider  such  a 
bare,  tremendous  declaration  as  that,  and  I  know 


240  UNION  PORTRAITS 

no  reason  to  suppose  that  he  would  have  modified 
it  later. 

Even  in  lines  connected  with  his  own  special, 
glorious  achievement,  we  find  no  evidence  of  emo- 
tional susceptibility.  Warrington,  a  not  unfriendly 
critic,  wrote:  "Mr.  Sumner  was  one  who  did  not 
care  for  or  deal  with  man,  but  with  men;  whose 
studies  were  in  the  direction  of  the  rights  of  races, 
not  attracted  toward  the  misfortunes  of  individ- 
uals/' 21  This  does  not  mean  that  he  was  in  any 
way  selfish,  or  harsh,  or  inconsiderate.  He  was  the 
direct  contrary  of  all  these  bad  things.  But  he  was 
not  prompted  by  any  quick  sympathy  for  the  feel- 
ings of  others.  It  was  said  that  his  advocacy  of 
the  negro  absorbed  him  so  completely  that  he  had 
no  concern  for  white  misery,  even  among  his  own 
constituents.  Bradbury,  of  Maine,  inquired  of  a 
poor  woman  whose  claim  had  been  rejected  by  the 
Senate,  why  she  did  not  ask  her  own  Senator  to 
support  her.  "Oh,  sir,  I  did,  but  really,  sir,  Mr. 
Sumner  takes  no  interest  in  claims  unless  they  be 
from  black  people."  22  And  the  caustic  Welles  has 
his  merciless  criticism,  even  in  regard  to  black 
people:  "He  would  not  only  free  the  slaves,  but 
elevate  them  above  their  former  masters,  yet,  with 
all  his  studied  philanthropy  and  love  for  the  ne- 
groes in  the  abstract,  is  unwilling  to  fellowship 
with  them,  though  he  thinks  he  is.  It  is,  however, 
ideal,  book  philanthropy."  23 


CHARLES  SUMNER  241 

II 

It  has  been  urged  by  many  that  Sumner  had,  at 
any  rate,  one  idea,  besides  the  abolition  of  slavery, 
and  that  idea  was,  Charles  Sumner.  If  it  be  meant 
by  this  that  he  was  in  any  way  selfish  or  self-seek- 
ing, that  he  was  absorbed  in  his  own  advantage  or 
advancement,  that  he  was  ready  to  engross  to  him- 
self honors  or  privileges  or  profits  that  should  have 
belonged  to  others,  the  view  is  utterly  false.  But 
it  is  true  that  to  him  Charles  Sumner  occupied  a 
rather  prominent  position  in  the  universe.  This 
was  not  merely  a  superficial  vanity,  an  aggressive 
assertion  of  his  own  achievements,  such  as  diverts 
us  in  Seward  and  in  Cicero,  and  such  as  is  often 
compatible  with  and  indeed  prompted  by  a  keen 
self-distrust.  In  Sumner's  case  it  was  a  placid, 
complacent  satisfaction,  a  solid,  foursquare  assur- 
ance that  the  world  needed  him,  unshaken  by 
doubt  and  undisturbed  by  diffidence.  The  world 
did  need  him,  but  perhaps  not  quite  so  sorely  as 
he  thought. 

It  is  difficult  to  find  any  break  in  this  self-confi- 
dence. The  vast  extent  of  Sumner's  speeches  and 
correspondence  would  seem  to  open  a  wide  door 
into  his  inner  life.  I  have  examined  these  writings 
with  a  curious  eye  for  any  intimation  of  self-dis- 
trust or  even  of  self-criticism.  I  have  searched  in 
vain.  He  does,  indeed,  accompany  presentation 
copies  of  his  works  with  perfunctory  apology. 


UNION  PORTRAITS 

When  he  is  elected  to  the  Senate,  he  accepts  with 
no  enthusiasm;  but  his  hesitation  is  not  from  doubt 
of  his  ability,  but  from  unwillingness  to  relinquish 
other  pursuits.  On  one  occasion  only,  in  the  whole 
course  of  his  life,  do  I  find  him  acknowledging 
a  "sense  of  weakness,  inferiority,  and  incompe- 
tency."  24  And  where  was  this?  In  the  presence 
of  Niagara  Falls. 

One  need  not  go  to  Sumner's  enemies  for  evi- 
dence of  his  enveloping  self-confidence  and  self- 
absorption.  Did  not  Longfellow,  who  loved  him 
with  his  own  peculiar  tenderness,  write,  with  a 
sigh,  "What  confidence  Sumner  has  in  Sumner. 
I  would  not  trust  H.  W.  L.  to  that  amount,  nor 
would  you  G.  W.  G."  25  Senator  Hoar,  one  of  his 
predecessor's  warmest  defenders,  admits  that  "it 
sometimes  seemed  as  if  Sumner  thought  the  Rebel- 
lion itself  was  put  down  by  speeches  in  the  Senate, 
and  that  the  war  was  an  unfortunate  and  most 
annoying,  though  trifling  disturbance,  as  if  a  fire- 
engine  had  passed  by/'  26  While  Bigelow,  less 
friendly,  perhaps,  but  no  enemy,  draws  a  striking 
picture  of  later  years:  "His  illness  has  not  im- 
proved his  manners,  but  rather  brought  out  his 
worst  points.  He  is  more  than  ever  the  centre  of 
the  system  in  which  he  lives.  He  did  not  ask  a 
question  which  indicated  the  least  interest  in  any 
mortal  or  thing  but  himself."  27 

Mr.  Storey,  admitting  the  truth  of  these  charges 
as  to  the  years  after  the  war,  thinks  that  the  long 


CHARLES  SUMNER  243 

struggle  had  made  Sumner  "egotistical  and  dog- 
matic/' but  that  he  was  "originally  modest  and 
not  self-confident/' 28  The  point  is  a  very  curious 
one;  but  such  investigation  as  I  have  been  able  to 
give  does  not  appear  to  me  to  establish  it.  The 
self-confidence  and  self-absorption  of  early  days 
were  naturally  different  from  the  same  qualities 
later.  But  the  substance  was  the  same.  It  was 
substance,  not  shadow,  and  therefore  must  have 
been  the  same.  The  pedantry  of  youth  developed 
gradually  into  the  dogmatism  of  age.  And  what  is 
pedantry  ever  but  the  excessive  predominance  of 
self? 

In  Sumner's  speeches  the  pedantry  is  obvious 
everywhere  and  nobody  denies  it.  It  would  be 
useless  to  accumulate  instances.  Let  one  little 
touch  show  how  subtly  it  permeates  even  minor 
matters.  "Three  men  once  governed  the  mighty 
Roman  world.  Three  facts  govern  the  present  case 
with  the  power  of  a  triumvirate."  29  Fancy  lug- 
ging in  the  commonplace  of  history  after  this 
fashion!  To  take  a  more  elaborate  example:  in 
one  of  his  last  orations,  that  on  the  Pilgrim  Fore- 
fathers, the  speaker  introduces  a  full-page  list  of 
seventeenth-century  crowned  heads  in  Europe, 
twenty-seven  of  them,  with  their  titles  enumerated 
at  length,  and  why?  Because  all  these  worthies  had 
their  portraits  painted  and  the  Pilgrims  had  not.30 
It  may,  indeed,  be  argued,  justly,  that  a  certain 
amount  of  this  sort  of  thing  belonged  to  all  the 


244  UNION  PORTRAITS 

eloquence  of  that  day,  and  that  now  we  have  got 
rid  of  the  drapery  for  bare  facts,  just  as  we  have 
got  rid  of  the  hoopskirts  that  went  with  it.  Sew- 
ard's  speeches  have  their  rhetoric.  Toombs's  have. 
Stephens's  have.  But  Sumner's  tone  is  different 
from  theirs. 

The  pedantry  is  not  in  his  speeches  alone.  It 
followed  him  in  all  his  official  doings,  with  a  cer- 
tain lack  of  adaptability  to  situations,  a  gift  for 
saying  the  wrong  word,  an  aptitude  for  doing 
things,  right  in  themselves,  in  a  way  that  was  not 
happy.  Take  the  inimitable  scene,  described  by 
General  Butterfield,  in  which  Lincoln  foils  the 
Senator's  determination  to  outstay  the  general.31 
Take  the  hopeless  answer  to  Lincoln's  genial  prop- 
osition to  compare  heights  by  standing  back  to 
back,  that  it  was  better  to  present  a  united  front 
to  the  enemy  than  united  backs,  with  Lincoln's 
precious  comment,  "  I  have  never  had  much  to  do 
with  Bishops  where  I  live;  but  do  you  know, 
Sumner  is  my  idea  of  a  Bishop."  32  Take  the 
formal  meeting  after  Lincoln's  death,  when  Stan- 
ton  was  reading  a  carefully  prepared  procla- 
mation and  was  interrupted  in  the  middle  by 
Summer's  portentous  "Stop!"  Stanton  suggested 
deferring  criticism  till  he  had  finished.  "Stop!" 
repeated  Sumner.  Again  Stanton  begged  for 
silence,  and  was  again  finally  blocked  by  that 
terrific  "Stop!"  33  How  he  must  have  loved  the 
Senator  at  that  moment!  One  hardly  wonders 


I 


CHARLES  SUMNER 


CHARLES  SUMNER  245 

that  as  a  practicing  lawyer  Sumner  did  not  wholly 
succeed. 

The  same  pernicious  habit  appeared  with  the 
most  intimate  friends.  Even  of  Sumner  one  can 
hardly  credit  the  story  that,  at  fifteen  years  old, 
when  his  mother  reproved  him  for  being  late  to 
breakfast,  he  quietly  remonstrated,  "  Call  me  Mr. 
Sumner,  mother,  if  you  please/' 34  But  the  whole 
man  —  the  big  voice,  the  six  feet  odd  of  luxuriant 
platform  manner  —  rushes  before  you  in  the  reply 
to  Colonel  Higginson's  mildly  expressed  doubt  as 
to  a  certain  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court,  "I 
suppose  I  know  more  about  judges  than  any  man 
in  America/'35  and  again  in  Lowell's  stinging  com- 
ment: '"I  advise  you  to  listen  to  this/  Sumner 
used  to  say,  when  he  was  talking  about  himself  (as 
he  commonly  was):  'this  is  history/"  36 

In  fact,  we  have  Sumner's  own,  hardly  impeach- 
able  evidence,  that  he  posed  even  when  he  was 
alone.  "He  once  told  me,"  says  Noah  Brooks, 
"  that  he  never  allowed  himself,  even  in  the  privacy 
of  his  own  chamber,  to  fall  into  a  position  which 
he  would  not  take  in  his  chair  in  the  Senate."  37 
This,  I  think,  it  would  be  hard  to  beat,  in  all  the 
records  of  history. 

Sumner's  pedantry  is  associated  by  almost  every 
one  with  a  total  lack  of  humor.  Nobody  totally 
lacks  humor.  Sumner  said  a  number  of  witty 
things,  and  appreciated  some,  and  had,  doubtless, 
his  own  peculiar  sense  of  the  comic.  But  this  sense 


246  UNION  PORTRAITS 

was  rather  limited,  and  never,  oh,  never,  did 
Charles  Sumner  appear  to  himself  a  humorous  ob- 
ject, in  any  possible  light.  Mr.  Storey  asserts,  with 
entire  justice,  that  this  lack  of  feeling  for  the 
humorous  was  intimately  connected  with  Sumner's 
inability  to  take  another  person's  point  of  view. 
But  I  think,  in  consideration  of  some  elements  in 
the  analysis  we  have  been  making,  we  may  carry 
the  conclusion  a  little  further,  and  say  that  it  was 
Sumner's  lack  of  intense  feelings  of  his  own  that 
made  him  incapable  of  entering  into  the  feelings 
of  others. 

ill 

It  would  seem,  from  the  preceding  investigation, 
that  Sumner  was  not  likely  to  be  personally  popu- 
lar. This  deduction  is  far  from  the  fact.  He  had, 
of  course,  many  detractors  and  some  bitter  ene- 
mies; but  at  all  periods  of  life  he  had  most  affec- 
tionate friends,  besides  an  immense  circle  who 
regarded  him  with  a  kindness  almost  approaching 
tenderness.  After  his  death,  even  among  those 
who  could  not  consider  him  a  great  genius,  there 
were  hundreds  who  would  have  said  with  Norton: 
"I  have  a  very  kindly  feeling  to  his  memory;  I 
should  like  to  have  more  respect  for  it."  38 

The  love  of  Longfellow  is  in  itself  enough  to 
accredit  any  man,  and  there  were  few  whom 
Longfellow  cherished  with  the  peculiar  tenderness 
he  gave  to  Sumner.  How  enthusiastic,  and  at  the 


CHARLES  SUMNER  247 

same  time  how  discriminating  in  its  enthusiasm, 
is  the  praise  with  which  the  poet  sent  his  friend 
across  the  water  to  another  friend:  "He  is  a  very 
lovely  character,  as  you  will  find  —  full  of  talent; 
with  a  most  keen  enjoyment  of  life;  simple,  ener- 
getic, hearty,  good;  with  a  great  deal  of  poetry 
and  no  nonsense  about  him/'  39 

The  testimony  of  many  others  of  the  wise 
and  just  is  equally  decided:  Lieber,  W.  W.  Story, 
Motley,  Pierce,  and,  in  a  later  generation,  Mr. 
Moorfield  Storey  and  Mr.  Lodge.  All  these  men, 
and  hosts  of  others  who  knew  Sumner  intimately, 
regarded  him  with  deep  and  lasting  affection. 

But  what  is  more  notable  still  is  that  he  seems 
to  have  made  himself  generally  acceptable  in  a  far 
wider  sphere.  The  story  of  his  European  travels, 
as  told  in  his  own  letters  and  in  those  of  others,  is 
one  of  the  most  remarkable  instances  of  social 
success  that  are  recorded  anywhere.  A  young  man, 
with  nothing  but  his  personal  merits  to  support 
him,  he  went  to  England,  to  France,  to  Germany, 
to  Italy,  and  mingled  in  the  very  best  society 
that  Europe  at  that  time  afforded.  Great  lords 
honored  him,  great  ladies  invited  him,  great  wits 
discoursed  with  him.  Earls  and  duchesses  estab- 
lished a  correspondence  that  lasted  a  lifetime,  and 
addressed  this  American  democrat  as  "My  dearest 
friend/'  He  talks  familiarly  with  Peel,  with  Rus- 
sell, with  Gladstone,  with  Louis  Philippe  and 
Cavour.  The  caustic  Rogers  confides  in  him,  the 


248  UNION  PORTRAITS 

eccentric,  overbearing  Brougham  praises  his  legal 
knowledge,  and  men  and  women  both  concur  in  a 
verdict  similar  to  that  of  Mrs.  Grote:  "I  may 
safely  affirm  that  no  visitor  from  the  United  States 
ever  received  more  flattering  attention  than  Mr. 
Sumner  from  both  English  and  Scottish  houses."  40 
There  is  no  disputing  this  immense  social  success 
of  Sumner,  certainly  much  more  marked  abroad, 
but  in  the  same  line  as  what  he  obtained  at  home, 
especially  in  early  life.  While  it  may  not  oblige  us 
to  modify  any  of  the  observations  we  have  hitherto 
made  on  his  character,  it  does  require  that  they 
should  be  supplemented  by  others  somewhat  dif- 
ferent. To  be  sure,  in  the  second  quarter  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  Americans  were  beginning  to 
be  a  fashion  in  England.  Cooper  and  Irving  were 
well  received,  Ticknor  quite  as  enthusiastically  as 
Sumner.  Yet  this  alone  will  not  answer  our  ques- 
tion, nor  will  the  fretful  comment  of  the  acri- 
monious Carlyle,  "Oh,  yes;  Mr.  Sumner  was  a 
vera  dull  man,  but  he  did  not  offend  people,  and 
he  got  on  in  society  here."  41  Inoffensiveness  is, 
no  doubt,  a  master  social  key,  and  it  did  not  hang 
in  Carlyle's  jingling  bunch,  but  it  will  not  alone 
suffice  to  unlock  the  doors  of  secretaries  and  prime 
ministers,  of  duchesses  and  earls,  of  great  painters 
and  poets.  If  we  had  no  other  clue  than  this,  we 
should  have  to  subside  with  the  frankness  of 
Abraham  Hayward,  and  simply  say  we  could  not 
make  it  out.42 


CHARLES  SUMNER  249 

But  there  are  other  clues,  plenty  of  them.  In 
the  first  place  Sumner  commended  himself  by  his 
interest  in  everything,  his  eternally  vigilant,  inex- 
haustible curiosity.  He  had  not  one  atom  of  the 
toady,  or  even  of  the  intentional  flatterer  about 
him,  but  there  is  no  more  effective  flattery  than 
ready  and  attentive  listening,  and  Sumner,  in  his 
younger  days,  when  he  was  not  talking  himself,  is 
admitted  to  have  been  a  listener  of  the  first  quality. 
He  wanted  to  hear  everything,  to  know  every- 
thing. Perhaps  his  curiosity  was  not  very  discrim- 
inating, but  it  was  enormous,  with  the  vigor  of 
healthy  nerves  and  a  mind  not  much  preoccupied 
internally.  If  he  entered  a  museum,  he  wanted 
the  history  of  every  specimen.  If  he  visited  a  gar- 
den, he  asked  the  name  of  every  tree.  If  he  passed 
a  fish  market,  on  a  morning  stroll,  he  inspected 
the  herd  of  Neptune  with  as  much  inquisitiveness 
as  if  he  had  to  deliver  an  oration  on  the  value  of 
Lenten  nutriment.  When  he  stays  at  an  English 
country  house,  he  finds  everybody  riding  to 
hounds,  therefore  he  must.  At  home  he  had  never 
been  a  sportsman,  but  he  is  here  to  see  the  habits 
of  the  English,  and  so  he  rides,  perhaps  not  ele- 
gantly, but  with  an  energy  that  is  persistent  and 
indomitable.43 

A  man  may  be  curious,  however,  and  be  an  in- 
tolerable bore.  Apparently  no  one  found  Sumner 
so.  Besides  his  curiosity,  there  was  his  singular 
simplicity.  Whatever  faults  he  had,  lack  of  candor 


250  UNION  PORTRAITS 

was  not  one  of  them.  He  was  absolutely  genuine 
and  sincere.  Even  from  his  foreign  social  triumph 
he  brought  back  no  affectation,  no  pseudo-aristoc- 
racy, no  snobbishness.  He  may  have  tied  his  tie 
and  carried  his  cane  after  the  English  fashion.  But 
his  heart  remained  thoroughly  democratic  and 
thoroughly  American. 

And  Sumner  had  a  further  claim  to  the  kindness 
of  others.  He  was  consistently  kind  and  amiable 
himself.  "His  smile  is  very  beautiful/'  wrote  a 
lady  who  knew  him  well;  "lighting  up  his  usually 
stern  face,  and  melting  away  all  its  coldness.  I 
never  saw  a  face  before  which  was  so  changed  by  a 
smile/'  44  Smiles  of  that  description  are  wonderful 
friend-winners.  All  servants  and  dependents  loved 
Sumner.  Children  loved  him.  "He  is  a  man  to 
whom  all  children  come."  Could  there  be  more 
charming  testimony  to  amiability  of  character 
than  that?  Animals  loved  him.  All  dogs  in  him 
recognized  a  friend.45 

Sumner  was  perfectly  ready  to  carry  this  same 
amiability  into  political  life.  The  evidence  is  in- 
disputable that,  although  he  was  involved  in  bit- 
ter controversy  during  all  his  public  career,  he 
rarely  cherished  anything  like  enmity,  rancor,  or 
personal  grudge.  In  later  years  his  attacks  on 
Johnson  and  Grant  seemed  to  have  an  element  of 
personal  irritation;  but  he  himself  would  never 
have  admitted  this,  holding  that  his  zeal  was 
wholly  and  solely  for  the  public  good.  Through  his 


CHARLES  SUMNER  251 

earlier  battle  with  the  South  he  was  remarkably 
free  from  violence  of  temper  or  any  partisan  ani- 
mosity. His  whole  tone  toward  Brooks,  after  the 
assault,  was  dignified  and  generous,  not  a  forgive- 
ness of  the  lips  only,  but  a  large  appreciation  of  the 
working  of  circumstances  to  bring  about  a  disaster 
in  which  his  assailant  was  hardly  more  than  an 
unconscious  instrument.  Writing  to  Miss  Child  of 
the  cordial  relations  which  at  first  obtained  be- 
tween him  and  his  opponents,  he  says:  "This  ex- 
perience would  teach  me,  if  I  needed  the  lesson, 
to  shun  harsh  and  personal  criticism  of  those 
from  whom  I  differ."  46  And  elsewhere  he  remarks 
of  himself,  with  some  complacency  but  much 
truth,  "It  is  my  nature  to  be  more  touched  by 
the  kindness  of  friends  than  by  the  malignity  of 
enemies,  and  I  know  something  of  both."  47 

The  curious,  the  extraordinary,  thing  is  that 
it  was  this  constitutional  amiability,  abetted,  no 
doubt,  by  the  lack  of  very  profound  feeling  I  have 
suggested  above,  which  made  Sumner  one  of  the 
most  irritating,  exasperating  of  political  oppo- 
nents. Nothing  that  his  enemies  said  could  hurt 
him.  Why,  then,  should  anything  he  said  hurt 
them?  The  most  savage,  the  most  virulent,  use 
of  words  that  an  ample  vocabulary  could  support 
was  perfectly  legitimate  warfare.  After  all,  they 
were  but  words,  why  should  they  wound?  Thus, 
all  through  his  career,  he  kept  lashing  men's  backs 
with  verbal  scorpions,  and  then  innocently  won- 


252  UNION  PORTRAITS 

dering  why  they  did  not  like  it.  His  first  notable 
speech  was  in  favor  of  universal  peace.  It  was 
delivered  before  an  audience  composed  largely  of 
military  and  naval  men.  He  told  them,  in  sub- 
stance, that  all  war  was  a  crime  and  that  they 
represented  a  plague-spot  in  the  community.  His 
remarks  were  not  very  well  received.  His  abuse 
of  Douglas  and  of  the  slaveholders  has  too  much 
in  common  with  their  abuse  of  him,  and  what 
more  can  be  said?  His  later  speeches,  against 
Grant  and  his  administration,  are  at  least  as 
tactlessly  offensive  as  his  earlier. 

Yet,  in  saying  all  these  things,  he  was  calm, 
deliberate,  apparently  had  no  idea  of  the  cruel 
wounds  he  was  inflicting.  Nothing  illustrates  this 
excess  of  misguided  amiability  better  than  Schurz's 
account  of  his  begging  Sumner  not  to  abuse  Grant 
in  a  proposed  speech,  of  Sumner's  abusing  the 
President  in  the  bitterest  manner,  and  then  re- 
marking to  Schurz  afterwards,  "You  saw  I  was 
very  moderate  and  temperate,  and  I  hope  you 
think  I  was  wise  not  to  be  more  severe."  48 

IV 

The  same  curious  mixture  of  kindness  and  un- 
compromising severity  is  to  be  seen  in  Sumner's 
friendships.  These  form  one  of  the  most  attractive 
elements  in  his  career.  In  nothing  does  he  come 
nearer  to  real  depth  and  tenderness  of  feeling 
than  in  his  relations  with  Longfellow,  with  Felton, 


CHARLES  SUMNER  253 

with  Dana,  with  Lieber.  When  he  left  for  Wash- 
ington to  enter  the  Senate,  he  parted  from  his 
home  associations  with  what  seem  to  have  been 
real  tears.  "Three  times  yesterday  I  wept  like  a 
child/'  he  writes  to  Howe.  "I  could  not  help  it: 
first  in  parting  with  Longfellow,  next  in  parting 
with  you,  and  lastly  as  I  left  my  mother  and 
sister."  49  How  simple  and  winning  is  his  expres- 
sion of  longing  for  Lieber: ."I  am  more  and  more 
desolate  and  alone.  I  wish  you  and  your  dear 
wife  lived  here.  You  would  allow  me  to  enter  your 
house  and  be  at  home;  to  recline  on  the  sofa  and 
play  the  part  of  a  friend  of  the  house.  I  lead  a 
joyless  life,  with  very  little  sympathy."  50  And 
Longfellow,  with  his  fine  gift  for  expressing  affec- 
tion, writes  to  Greene  of  Summer's  letters  from 
Italy:  "They  are  full  of  enthusiasm,  and  exhibit 
the  softer  and  more  poetical  side  of  his  character, 
—  a  side  so  little  known  or  dreamed  of  by  most 
people.  He  speaks  of  you  often,  and  never  without 
a  caress."  51 

Yet  if  any  of  these  cherished  friends  presumed 
to  differ  politically,  Sumner  said  words  that  made 
friendly  relations  impossible,  for  the  time  at  any 
rate.  With  Longfellow  no  man  could  quarrel,  any 
more  than  with  an  archangel.  But,  although  Dana 
and  the  Senator  usually  agreed,  there  was  a  period 
of  decided  estrangement.52  Felton  and  Sumner 
had  been  most  intimate  in  every  way,  but  politics 
severed  them,  Sumner  writing,  characteristically, 


254  UNION  PORTRAITS 

"In  anguish  I  mourn  your  altered  regard  for 
me;  but  more  than  my  personal  loss,  I  mourn 
the  present  unhappy  condition  of  your  mind  and 
character."  53 

Lieber  was  long  a  devoted  admirer  and  eulogist. 
He  ventured  criticism  of  some  of  his  friend's 
utterances  and  was  rebuked  from  the  usual  lofty 
plane.  Thereupon  he  writes :  "  His  conduct  towards 
me  in  this  matter  has  been  outrageous  and  un- 
manly. .  .  .  Sumner  requires  adulation  and  I  am 
no  flatterer."  54  Yet  in  later  years  their  inter- 
course was  renewed,  and  apparently  became  as 
active  as  it  had  ever  been. 

Sumner's  marriage  has  peculiar  interest  in  the 
light  of  the  analysis  we  have  thus  far  made  of  his 
character.  A  bachelor  of  nearly  sixty  woos  a 
charming  widow  of  thirty.  They  marry  in  the 
autumn  —  and  part  in  the  spring,  as  might  have 
been  expected.  It  is  quite  unnecessary  to  go  into 
the  various  gossiping  reasons  for  such  a  result. 
Human  nature  supplies  enough  of  them. 

Sumner  entered  into  the  match  with  the  earnest, 
and  unfortunately  rather  novel,  preoccupation  of 
making  some  one  else  happy.55  He  came  out  of  it 
embittered  and  suffering  sincere  distress.  "Long 
afterward  he  confided  to  a  friend  that  'thoughts 
of  suicide  haunted  him,  and  then  visions  of  with- 
drawing from  the  world,  and  burying  himself  in 
some  lonely  chalet  amid  Swiss  mountains/"  56 
Probably  this  was  not  all  literature.  But  I  find 


CHARLES  SUMNER  255 

no  evidence  that  he  ever  dreamed  it  possible  he 
might  have  been  at  fault. 

As  for  Mrs.  Sumner,  her  case  is  covered  by  the 
remark  of  Bryant  in  regard  to  it  that  a  wife  "is 
not  content  with  a  husband  who  is  too  exclusively 
occupied  with  himself  and  his  own  greatness."57 
It  is  simply  another  instance  of  a  woman's  marry- 
ing a  man  because  he  is  devoted  to  all  mankind 
and  leaving  him  because  he  is  not  devoted  to  her. 
Sumner,  we  can  well  understand,  was,  as  a  hus- 
band, always  gentle,  always  considerate,  always 
unselfish,  and  always  exasperating.  I  imagine  that, 
after  six  months  of  marriage,  Mrs.  Sumner  came 
to  have  a  certain  tenderness  for  the  memory  of 
Preston  Brooks. 

As  the  theory  of  Sumner's  egotism  and  self- 
absorption  seems  to  be  to  some  extent  contra- 
dicted by  the  number  and  warmth  of  his  friend- 
ships, so  it  seems  also  not  quite  compatible  with 
his  lack  of  distinct,  definite,  and  personal  ambition. 
Until  he  entered  political  life,  at  the  age  of  forty, 
we  find  no  indication  of  a  haunting  desire  to  do 
anything  great.  Though  he  lived  in  the  company 
of  authors,  he  expresses  no  wish  to  rival  them. 
So  in  politics.  He  was  elected  Senator  almost 
against  his  will,  having  never  concerned  himself 
in  any  way  with  the  ordinary  methods  of  political 
advancement.  Although  the  senatorship  probably 
meant  more  to  him  than  he  said  or  thought  it  did, 
he  did  not  cherish  it  with  any  devouring  eagerness. 


256  UNION  PORTRAITS 

It  is  asserted  that  at  various  times  he  entertained 
visions  of  the  Presidency,  but  if  so,  it  was  because 
he  thought  that  the  office  needed  Charles  Sumner 
more  than  Charles  Sumner  needed  the  office. 

The  same  is  true  of  that  curious  phenomenon, 
the  publication  of  his  complete  works,  which  was 
begun  under  his  own  supervision  and  carried  out 
after  his  death  in  fifteen  solid  volumes.  Such  mi- 
nute care  of  one's  own  productions,  the  reprinting 
of  every  little  letter  bearing  in  any  way  on  one's 
own  political  activity,  would  seem  to  prove  an 
intense  longing  to  perpetuate  one's  reputation  with 
posterity.  No  doubt  Sumner  had  something  of 
this  hope.  But  I  think  he  was  quite  as  much  in- 
fluenced by  the  feeling  that  here  were  precious 
thoughts  and  rich  ideas  that  posterity  could  ill 
afford  to  be  without.  What  a  poignant  pathos 
there  is  in  realizing  how  very  small  a  portion  of 
those  fifteen  volumes  may  be  read  to-day  with 
either  profit  or  delight. 

v 

For  the  man  was,  after  and  above  all,  a  gesture 
of  the  time-spirit,  a  voice  uttering  something  that 
the  world  passionately  needed  to  have  uttered  and 
that  no  one  at  that  moment  could  utter  so  effec- 
tively as  he.  Others  furnished  the  brains  of  the 
anti-slavery  movement,  others  furnished  the  high- 
wrought  imaginative  enthusiasm,  others  furnished 
the  hands  and  the  physical,  fighting  vigor.  Also, 


CHARLES  SUMNER  257 

we  may  doubt  now  whether  the  movement  itself 
was  in  all  ways  a  wise  and  practical  one.  But,  in 
any  case,  it  was  a  great  moral  protest,  a  great  up- 
heaval of  progressive  humanity  against  cruelty  and 
wrong,  and  Sumner  was  the  splendid  political 
organ  and  instrument  by  which  that  protest  found 
expression.  He  had  the  muscles,  he  had  the  nerves 
—  or  lack  of  nerves,  he  had  the  exhaustless  energy 
and  capacity  for  labor,  he  had  the  courage,  he  had 
the  aspect,  which  goes  such  a  long  way,  he  had 
the  abundant,  redundant,  resounding  tumult  and 
torrent  of  speech. 

Thus  his  whole  political  career,  his  whole  life, 
is  identified  with,  is  embodied  in  the  great  moral 
movement  to  free  the  negro  and  make  him,  politi- 
cally at  any  rate,  the  equal  of  the  white.  And  no 
more  imposing  monument  could  be  designed  for 
any  man  than  success  in  such  an  effort.  Sumner's 
anti-slavery  struggle  may  be  said  to  have  begun 
in  connection  with  the  return  of  fugitive  slaves 
from  Massachusetts.  From  his  election  to  the 
Senate,  in  1851,  it  became  the  preoccupation  of 
his  life.  In  speech  after  speech  he  poured  out  his 
fierce  antipathy  to  the  great  Southern  institution 
and  the  slaveholders  who  supported  it,  until  the 
wrath  of  Preston  Brooks  eliminated  him  from  the 
contest  for  the  time.  As  soon  as  it  was  possible 
for  him  to  return,  the  denunciation  was  renewed. 
During  the  war  he  urged  tirelessly  that  slaves 
should  be  emancipated.  After  the  war  he  insisted 


258  UNION  PORTRAITS 

that  their  civil  and  political  rights  should  be  se- 
cured, that  they  should  be  given  every  privilege 
and  opportunity  that  was  open  to  the  whites.  In 
one  of  his  later  speeches  he  summed  up,  in  a  few 
words,  all  that  he  had  sought  and  stood  for:  "Sir, 
my  desire,  the  darling  desire,  if  I  may  say  so,  of 
my  soul,  at  this  moment,  is  to  close  forever  this 
question  so  that  it  shall  never  again  intrude  into 
these  chambers  —  so  that  hereafter,  in  all  our  leg- 
islation, there  shall  be  no  such  word  as  'white'  or 
"black/  but  that  we  shall  speak  only  of  citizens 
and  of  men." 58  Even  with  subjects  apparently  no 
way  germane  to  the  slavery  question  Sumner  suc- 
ceeded in  discovering  or  developing  some  phase  of 
his  unceasing  activity. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  in  carrying  out  this  great 
effort  of  statesmanship  Sumner's  very  limitations 
were  of  advantage  to  him.  The  fact  that  he  was 
not  an  idealist,  not  an  enthusiast,  made  him  prac- 
tical in  his  methods.  He  wanted  to  see  slavery 
abolished,  but  he  had  no  sympathy  with  the  ex- 
treme view  that  the  Union  should  be  sacrificed, 
if  the  Union  and  slavery  seemed  inseparable.  They 
were  separable  and  they  must  be  separated.  To 
destroy  the  Union  would  perpetuate  slavery  in- 
stead of  abolishing  it. 

So,  for  his  purposes,  it  was  a  gain  that  he  should 
be  uncompromising,  that  he  should  have  a  fine 
and  unalterable  belief  that  the  conclusion  of 
Charles  Sumner  was  the  conclusion  of  abstract 


CHARLES  SUMNER  259 

truth.  Schurz  writes  that  when  some  one  asked 
Sumner  whether  he  had  ever  looked  at  the  other 
side  of  the  slavery  question,  he  answered:  "'There 
is  no  other  side/  ...  It  was  difficult  for  him  to 
understand  how  any  one  could  seriously  consider 
the  other  side  without  being  led  astray  by  some 
moral  obliquity/'  59 

And  this  same  clear-cut,  unquestioning  view  of 
his  duty  made  him  splendidly  honest,  utterly  in- 
accessible to  all  those  suggestions  of  indirect 
method  which  are  apt  to  commend  themselves  to 
a  mind  that  is  too  subtle  in  considering  plausible 
alternatives.  Sumner's  inborn  rectitude  made  him 
seek  the  straight  course  only.  His  pride,  his  se- 
rene self-confidence,  made  him  follow  that  course 
without  wavering.  There  must  be  no  spot,  no 
taint,  no  stain  upon  such  a  person  as  Charles 
Sumner.  And  there  was  none. 

Lastly,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  he  was 
ready  to  endure  martyrdom  for  the  cause  that  he 
believed  in.  He  endured  social  martyrdom.  Abo- 
litionism was  not  popular  in  most  of  the  best 
Boston  families  when  Sumner  took  it  up,  and  he 
was  instantly  cut  off  from  some  of  the  homes  and 
firesides  that  had  been  dear  to  him.  It  is  pretty 
to  hear  Senator  Hoar,  who  had  a  somewhat  similar 
experience,  enlarge  with  mocking  exaggeration  on 
all  that  Sumner  suffered  in  this  way.60 

He  endured  a  physical  martyrdom  that  was  far 
more  serious.  To  cure  him  of  the  effects  of  Brooks's 


260  UNION  PORTRAITS 

attack,  Dr.  Brown-Sequard  put  him  through  the 
torture  of  the  moxa  treatment,  so  horrible  that 
shortly  after  that  time  it  was  abandoned,  as  too 
severe.  Sumner  bore  it  with  a  fortitude  that  was 
absolutely  heroic,  refusing  to  be  spared  one  single 
pang  that  might  enable  him  to  return  more  quickly 
into  the  hottest  of  the  fight. 

Yet,  as  I  have  said  earlier,  in  spite  of  his  great 
achievement,  and  the  energy  that  carried  it 
through,  I  cannot  find,  after  the  most  watchful 
consideration,  that  he  had  any  more  intensity  of 
feeling  in  regard  to  slavery  than  in  regard  to  any- 
thing else.  He  was  solemn,  he  was  serious,  he  was 
persistent.  He  had  not  the  passionate,  ideal  en- 
thusiasm of  Garrison,  of  Parker,  of  John  Brown. 
His  blood  occasionally  boils  —  on  paper.  He  is 
inflamed  with  zeal  —  on  paper.  In  reality,  he  goes 
at  his  task  with  a  sturdy,  tremendous,  physical 
determination  and  accomplishes  it.  Shelley  could 
never  have  accomplished  practically  one  hun- 
dredth part  of  what  Sumner  did.  But  how  absurd 
it  would  be  to  apply  to  Sumner  Shelley's  words 
about  himself,  — 

"Me,  who  am  as  a  nerve  o'er  which  do  creep 
The  else-unfelt  oppressions  of  this  earth." 

So  we  return  to  our  conclusion  that  Sumner  was 
simply  the  vocal  organ  of  one  of  the  greatest  moral 
movements  of  the  world:  "the  man,"  says  Senator 
Hoar,  "who  ever  deemed  himself  sitting  in  a  lofty 


CHARLES  SUMNER  261 

pulpit  with  a  mighty  sounding-board,  with  a  whole 
widespread  people  for  a  congregation."  61  He  be- 
lieved that  words  could  do  anything  and  few  men 
ever  went  further  in  demonstrating  that  words 
can.  If  he  was  only  a  voice,  vox  et  prseterea  nihil, 
and  I  fear  he  was  little  more,  it  may  at  least  be 
said  that  the  voice  uttered  nothing  that  was  base 
or  mean,  and  that,  even  in  its  most  wearisome 
iteration,  it  was  always  the  high  proclaimer  of  the 
moral  law. 


IX 

SAMUEL  BOWLES 


CHRONOLOGY 

Born  in  Springfield,  Massachusetts,  February  9,  1826. 
Persuaded  father  to  start  the  daily  "  Springfield  Republican," 

1844. 

Health  first  gave  out,  1844. 

Married  Mary  S.  D.  Schermerhorn,  September  6, 1848. 
Dr.  Holland  became  associate  editor  of  the  "Springfield 

Republican,"  1850. 
Severely  ill,  1852. 

Edited  the  "Boston  Traveller,"  1857. 
Visited  Europe  for  health,  1862. 
Visited  West,  1865, 1868,  1869. 
Visited  Europe,  chiefly  for  health,  1870, 1871, 1874. 
Died,  January  16, 1878. 


IX 

SAMUEL  BOWLES 

I 

IT  seems  highly  suitable  to  conclude  a  series  of 
Union  Portraits  with  a  study  of  one  of  the  great 
journalists,  who  played  so  important  a  part  during 
the  war  and  the  years  preceding  and  following. 
Several  of  these  men  have  wider  reputations  than 
Samuel  Bowles,  but  perhaps  hardly  any  was  more 
singly  and  intensely  identified  with  his  work. 
Weed  and  Greeley  had  an  active  personal  interest 
in  politics.  Dana  was  a  valuable  public  servant  as 
well  as  an  editor.  Garrison  was  something  far  dif- 
ferent from  a  mere  newspaper  man.  Bennett  was 
confessedly  a  money-maker.  Raymond  was,  in- 
deed, a  thorough  journalist,  and  Godkin  also,  one 
of  the  highest  type;  but  Godkin  was,  after  all,  not 
born  an  American,  though  perhaps  of  more  use  to 
us  on  that  account.  Then,  I  confess  that  what 
draws  me  chiefly  to  Bowles  is  that  no  other  jour- 
nalist— and  few  other  men  of  his  time — has  left 
us  so  complete,  vivid,  and  passionately  human  a 
record  of  himself. 

He  was  a  journalist  who  grew  as  his  paper  grew. 
He  had  little  more  education  than  that  of  simple 
New  England  home  life.  In  1844,  at  eighteen 


266  UNION  PORTRAITS 

years  of  age,  a  country  boy,  he  took  hold  of  his 
father's  weekly  country  paper,  the  "Springfield 
Republican,"  and  before  he  died,  he  made  it  one 
of  the  most  intelligent  and  valuable  dailies  in  the 
United  States,  "the  most  comprehensive  newspa- 
per/' declared  the  "Nation,"  at  the  time  of  his 
death,  "we  believe  it  is  no  exaggeration  to  say, 
in  the  country."  *  And  a  good  authority  asserted 
that  "no  American  journal  during  the  last  ten  or 
twenty  years  has  been  more  diligently  studied  by 
editors."  2 

There  was  always,  to  be  sure,  about  the  paper, 
as  about  its  editor,  a  certain  spice  of  provincialism, 
or,  as  he  would  have  put  it,  localism.  But  those 
who  know  the  old-fashioned  New  England  country 
towns  will  admit  that  their  atmosphere  may  be 
far  broader  and  less  fundamentally  provincial 
than  that  of  larger  centres.  There  was  fifty  years 
ago,  perhaps  there  is  to-day,  some  truth  in  this 
provincial  editor's  gibe  at  the  metropolis  of  his 
State:  "Always  except  Boston,  of  course,  which 
has  no  more  conception  of  what  is  going  on  in  the 
world  than  the  South  Sea  Islanders  themselves."  3 

Bowles's  whole  life,  outside  of  his  family  affec- 
tions, was  in  his  paper,  and  he  saw  the  world  and 
mankind  through  his  paper's  eyes.  Every  depart- 
ment was  always  under  his  immediate  supervision, 
and  he  interested  himself  as  much  in  the  advertis- 
ing and  business  management  as  in  the  editorials. 

When  he  began  work,  modern  possibilities  of 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  267 

news  were  just  developing,  and  he  seized  upon 
them  eagerly.  In  the  early  days  he  himself  re- 
ported, with  keen  observation  and  that  journal- 
istic sense  of  what  counts  which  is  more  than 
observation,  and  he  was  always  on  the  lookout  for 
capable  reporters.  "News/'  he  said,  "is  the  dis- 
tinctive object  of  the  'Republican'  to  which  all 
other  things  must  bend."  4  Some  thought  he  was 
not  over-particular  about  the  news  he  printed  or 
the  means  of  obtaining  it.  Even  his  ardent  biog- 
rapher, Merriam,  admits  that  he  sometimes  ap- 
peared to  cater  to  an  unhealthy  curiosity,  and  the 
ill-natured  review  of  Merriam  in  the  "Nation," 
said  to  be  by  W.  P.  Garrison,  calls  Bowles  "a 
great  gossip  and  by  no  means  a  safe  confidant." 5 
Yet  he  would  certainly  not  have  subscribed  with- 
out reserve  to  the  rather  generous  principle  of 
Dana,  "I  have  always  felt  that  whatever  the 
Divine  Providence  permitted  to  occur  I  was  not 
too  proud  to  report; " 6  just  as  Dana  himself  might 
have  shrunk  from  some  later  developments  of  his 
own  doctrine,  though  indeed  the  chief  error  of 
these  is  apt  to  consist  in  reporting  what  even  the 
Divine  Providence  did  not  permit  to  occur. 

But,  however  vast  his  appetite  for  news,  Bowles 
would  have  been  the  first  to  recognize  that  the 
newspaper  had  another  function  besides  mere 
reporting,  that  of  commenting  on  news  and 
shaping  public  opinion  in  regard  to  it.  How  im- 
portant this  function  is  can  best  be  realized  by 


268  UNION  PORTRAITS 

reflecting  that  it  did  not  exist  at  all  a  hundred 
years  ago,  and  that  even  now  it  hardly  exists  else- 
where as  it  does  in  America.  Up  to  the  year 
eighteen  hundred  the  pulpit  did  what  the  news- 
paper now  does.  The  minister  had  the  leading, 
because  he  had  the  reading,  of  the  community. 
He  commented  on  the  world's  doings  in  the  light 
of  the  moral  law,  and  men  went  away  and  saw 
God's  finger  in  everything.  Just  how  far  the  daily 
and  Sunday  papers  have  undermined  the  influence 
of  the  pulpit,  who  shall  say?  They  have  certainly 
taken  the  place  of  it,  with  some  gain  in  universal 
information,  but  with  enormous  moral  loss.  "  This 
country  is  not  priest-ridden,  but  press-ridden/' 
said  Longfellow  shrewdly.7  With  the  best  will  in 
the  world,  and  I  believe  such  will  is  seldom  alto- 
gether wanting,  the  editor  has  many  things  to 
consider  besides  moral  elevation,  and  even  if  he 
wishes  to  furnish  such  an  article,  he  is  not  always 
competent  to  do  so.  When  we  read  the  words  of 
Bowles,  "The  church  organization  seems  to  me 
a  failure  —  at  least  that  we  have  outgrown  it, 
or  are  fast  outgrowing  it,"  8  —  and  think,  as  he 
no  doubt  thought,  of  the  newspaper  as  supply- 
ing the  church's  place,  we  should  remember 
the  weighty  remark  of  Godkin  in  regard  to  the 
defects  and  dangers  of  journalism,  "defects  and 
dangers  which  nearly  every  one  sees  but  editors, 
and  which  it  would  be  well  if  editors  saw  oftener  — 
the  recklessness,  haste,  indifference  to  finish  and 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  269 

accuracy  and  abstract  justice  which  it  is  apt  to  be- 
get in  the  minds  of  those  who  pursue  it,  and  es- 
pecially of  those  who  pursue  it  eagerly."  9 

No  one  would  have  recognized  these  defects  in 
general  more  heartily  than  Bowles.  But  no  one 
was  more  earnest  in  insisting  upon  the  power  of 
the  press  as  guide  and  leader.  A  "Republican" 
editorial,  written  during  the  war,  which  we  may 
assume  to  be  his,  proclaims,  "  With  all  its  failings, 
with  all  its  prostitutions,'  the  press  is  the  great 
reliance  and  safeguard  in  a  time  like  this,  and  with 
a  government  like  ours.  And  we  believe  it  mainly 
appreciates  its  opportunities  and  responsibilities 
and  is  earnest  to  fulfill  them."  10  He,  at  any  rate, 
was  earnest,  and  he  did  his  very  best  to  make  a 
paper  that  should  bring  him  an  honest  livelihood 
and  should  at  the  same  time  be  a  great  and  inspir- 
ing influence  in  public  affairs,  should  consider  the 
public  good  only,  should  be  conservative  with  the 
radicals  and  progressive  with  the  conservatives, 
should  regard  principles  and  not  parties,  measures 
and  not  men,  and  should  follow  truth  without  the 
slightest  care  for  a  merely  formal  consistency. 

This  is  a  high  ideal  for  a  newspaper  or  anything 
else  in  this  imperfect  world,  and  it  is  needless  to 
say  that  the  "Republican,"  having  an  editor  who 
was  thoroughly  human,  did  not  always  live  up  to 
it.  It  is  a  fine  thing  to  avoid  extremes,  but  in 
doing  so  you  are  sure  to  become  obnoxious  to  all 
extremists.  Hence  the  "Republican,"  in  its  thirty 


270  UNION  PORTRAITS 

years'  development  during  Bowles's  life,  got  plenty 
of  shrewd  knocks  from  all  parties  in  succession. 
It  is  a  fine  thing  to  be  independent.  Unfortunately 
complete  independence  is  impossible.  There  are  so 
many  cross-twists  and  conflicting  considerations  to 
be  taken  into  account,  that  at  times  independence 
may  be  taken  for  discretion,  and  W.  P.  Garrison 
could  even  go  so  far  as  to  say  of  his  able  competi- 
tor that  as  a  politician  "he  was  essentially  timid 
and  time-serving."  n  Again,  it  is  a  fine  thing  to 
scorn  consistency.  Emerson  did,  and  why  should 
not  Sam  Bowles?  "  It  is  no  trouble  at  all  to  me, " 
he  says,  "that  the  paper  contradicts  itself.  My 
business  is  to  tell  what  seems  to  me  the  truth  and 
the  news  to-day.  .  .  .  It's  a  daily  journal.  I  am  not 
to  live  to  be  as  old  as  Methusaleh,  and  brood  in 
silence  over  a  thing  till,  just  before  I  die,  I  think 
I  have  it  right."  12  The  excuse  is  fascinating  cer- 
tainly, but  the  practice  is  apt  to  have  its  diffi- 
culties. 

These  difficulties  showed  in  nothing  more  than 
in  the  "Republican's"  —  and  its  editor's  —  de- 
lusions as  to  men.  One  hero  after  another  — 
Banks,  Dawes,  Colfax,  Greeley,  not  to  mention 
others  —  was  set  up  and  urged  upon  the  public, 
till  Time  stowed  them  all  neatly  away  in  the 
vast  wallet  that  contains  his  tribute  to  oblivion. 
Andrew,  wrote  Bowles,  in  1861,  "is  conceited, 
dogmatic,  and  lacks  breadth  and  tact  for  govern- 
ment," Lincoln  "is  a  'simple  Susan.'"  13  These 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  271 

are  things  that  a  man  —  or  a  newspaper  —  would 
rather  not  have  said. 

" 

II 

But  such  criticisms  do  not  alter  the  fact  that 
during  all  those  trying,  bitter,  passionate  years  the 
"Republican"  stood  earnestly  for  the  best,  the 
highest  things,  and  was  in  every  way  and  at 
every  point  alive.  If  it  was  so,  it  was  because 
Samuel  Bowles  was  as  thoroughly  alive  as  any 
man  who  ever  put  pen  to  paper  to  describe  the 
doings  and  sufferings  of  this  intricate  world.  He 
had  his  faults  and  weaknesses;  but  sloth  and  inertia 
and  indifference  were  not  among  them. 

All  the  man's  life,  his  whole  soul,  are  reflected 
in  the  letters  contained  in  his  biography,  which 
are  much  more  significant  than  his  formal  books 
of  travel  or  even  his  editorials.  It  is  a  great  pity 
that  his  correspondence  has  not  been  collected  and 
published  separately,  for  in  my  judgment  no  more 
telling,  varied,  human  letters  have  been  written 
upon  this  side  of  the  Atlantic. 

Dead  letters  do  not  mean  dead  souls.  There  are 
souls  touched  with  the  keenest  intensity  of  living 
that  either  cannot  or  will  not  reveal  themselves 
in  correspondence  with  even  their  most  intimate 
friends.  Take  as  an  instance  the  letters  of  Matthew 
Arnold.  Here  assuredly  was  a  man  of  the  widest 
thought  and  the  subtlest  spiritual  experience.  Yet 
he  writes  almost  wholly  of  practical  affairs,  in  a 


272  UNION  PORTRAITS 

dull  conventional  strain,  which  has  no  claim  to 
attention  except  undeniable  simplicity  and  sin- 
cerity. But  letters  alive  as  those  of  Bowles  must 
certainly  indicate  a  burning  heart  behind  them. 
Take  the  verve  of  a  scrap  from  one  of  the  earlier: 
"Croak,  croak,  croak!  Why  the  devil  can't  Berk- 
shire do  something  besides?  Let  those  who  are 
right  go  to  work."  14  Nor  is  it  in  any  way  a  matter 
of  mere  slang  or  expletives.  These  fly  freely  when 
they  add  force  or  color,  but  there  is  plenty  of 
force  and  color  without  them.  There  are  grace  and 
sparkle  in  the  adjectives,  there  is  delicate  sugges- 
tion in  the  sweep  of  the  phrases,  there  is  above  all 
that  cunning,  instinctive  use  of  rhythm  to  charm, 
to  spur,  to  stimulate,  which  is  perhaps  the  most 
effective  instrument  of  the  great  prose  writer.  "I 
should  chiefly  regret  Aiken  of  this  lot.  I  have  im- 
bibed a  good  deal  of  respect  for  that  man.  Ben 
Butler  says  he  is  an  exaggeration  of  the  stage 
Yankee;  but  he  is  fresh  and  hearty,  and  keen  and 
human,  and  says  civil  things  about  me  —  and  of 
course  I  like  him."  15  When  letters  run  on  like 
that,  through  two  stout  volumes,  we  are  bound  to 
learn  something  about  the  man  that  writes  them. 
First,  he  was  a  man  of  the  deepest,  tenderest 
affection  and  devotion.  He  married  very  young  a 
girl  who  was  very  young  and  their  attachment 
through  early  years  of  struggle  and  later  years  of 
illness  is  charming  to  study  and  appreciate.  They 
had  ten  children,  which  naturally  means  care, 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  273 

especially  for  a  worker  of  limited  means  and  nerv- 
ous temperament.  The  difference  of  sex  gleams 
vividly  in  the  father's  casual  remark  as  to  the 
death  of  one  at  birth:  "She  [Mrs.  Bowles]  feels 
her  loss  terribly.  Though  a  disappointment,  it  is 
a  small  matter  to  me,  only  as  it  affects  her."  16 

Yet  the  most  watchful  care  and  solicitude  for 
both  mother  and  children  are  everywhere  apparent, 
a  care  that  was  duly  and  lovingly  returned.  The 
husband's  full  appreciation  of  all  he  received  shows 
in  this  passage,  referring  to  a  journey  proposed  for 
his  benefit: "  Of  course  Mrs.  Bowles  is  always  ready 
to  say  go;  you  know  she  would  give  up  any  grati- 
fication, or  endure  any  suffering,  to  give  me  pleas- 
ure, or  get  me  out  of  the  way  of  a  half-day  of 
work.  But  that  does  n't  make  it  always  right  that 
I  should  take  her  at  her  word  —  by  no  means."  17 
While  this  constant  anxiety  for  the  welfare  of  the 
woman  he  adored  appears  characteristically  and 
delightfully  in  a  letter  laying  down  a  minute  pro- 
gramme of  what  she  should  do  for  her  health  every 
hour  in  the  day:  the  meals,  the  air,  the  exercise, 
the  society:  "Have  somebody  come  to  see  you 
every  day.  Read  newspapers  more.  Read  light 
books  more.  Study  things  that  make  for  fun  and 
peace."  18  And  we  know,  and  he  knew,  that  no- 
body ever  obeys  such  injunctions.  But  to  give 
them  eases  the  tired  heart  of  love  in  solitude. 
As  for  his  children,  his  care  of  them  was  guided 
by  this  exquisite  precept,  which  would  save  a 


274  UNION  PORTRAITS 

world  of  woe  if  it  were  written  on  every  parent's 
heart:  "It  is  not  much  that  I  do  for  my  children, 
but  I  never  want  to  lose  sight  of  myself  at  their 
ages  —  then  the  little  I  do  can  be  done  more  in- 
telligently." 19 

Nor  was  his  family  affection  all  care  and  solici- 
tude. As  to  his  children,  listen  to  this  pretty  rap- 
ture on  one  of  the  ten  in  infancy:  "He  is  practic- 
ing on  Yes  and  Mamma;  but  all  his  efforts  at  the 
latter  melt  sweetly  into  Papa  —  so  ravishingly."  20 
And  the  following  delicate  discrimination  proves 
the  thoughtful  study  of  enduring  tenderness:  "We 
are  all  pretty  well;  Ruth  is  a  breeze  from  the  north- 
west, and  D wight  from  the  south,  all  the  while; 
Bessie  is  dainty  and  shy  and  quaint  and  strange, 
and  Charlie  is  enterprising  beyond  his  power."  21 

As  for  the  depth  of  conjugal  devotion,  it  is 
shown  so  profoundly  and  so  searchingly  all  through 
the  book,  that  passages  are  difficult  to  choose. 
I  select  one  not  addressed  to  Mrs.  Bowles,  which, 
underneath  its  general  analysis  of  emotion,  im- 
plies personal  experience  of  the  deepest  and  most 
intimate  character:  "You  must  give  if  you  expect 
to  receive  —  give  happiness,  friendship,  love,  joy, 
and  you  will  find  them  floating  back  to  you. 
Sometimes  you  will  give  more  than  you  receive. 
We  all  do  that  in  some  of  our  relations,  but  it  is 
as  true  a  pleasure  often  to  give  without  return  as 
life  can  afford  us.  We  must  not  make  bargains 
with  the  heart,  as  we  would  with  the  butcher  for 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  275 

his  meat.  Our  business  is  to  give  what  we  have  to 
give  —  what  we  can  get  to  give.  The  return  we 
have  nothing  to  do  with.  It  will  all  come  in  due 
time  —  in  this  world  or  another."  22 

As  these  words  indicate,  Bowles's  sympathy  and 
tenderness  extended  far  beyond  the  family  circle. 
Indeed,  they  were  as  wide  as  the  world.  He  has 
observation  just  as  subtle  and  delicate  on  unself- 
ishness and  sacrifice  as  on  positive  affection: 
"We,  fortunately,  know  our  failures,  and,  alas, 
how  well  we  know  them.  And  yet,  out  of  our  very 
selfishness,  out  of  our  very  neglect,  God  buildeth 
us  up;  so  that  what  we  do  perform  for  kindred  and 
friends  takes  on  larger  power  and  gives  deeper 
bliss  than  if  in  a  narrow  way  we  had  given  more 
hours  and  thought  and  service  to  the  beloved.  It 
is  a  shadowy,  tender  line  between  service  to  our- 
selves and  service  to  others."  23 

It  is  true  that  this  is  a  newspaper  man,  who 
looked  at  life  from  the  journalistic  angle,  which  is 
not  always  strictly  humanitarian.  To  be  sure, 
even  as  an  editor  his  keen,  delightful  sympathies 
often  warm  his  impersonal  comment,  as  when  he 
writes  of  a  deceased  celebrity,  "Years  and  invalid 
experience  have  unlocked  for  us  some  of  the  mys- 
teries of  his  life;  we  know  him  better  lately  without 
seeing  him  at  all."  24  But  it  is  also  said  that  his 
zeal  for  news  sometimes  led  to  disastrous  revela- 
tions, as  when  he  stopped  prize-fighting  in  Spring- 
field by  printing  the  names  of  respected  citizens 


276  UNION  PORTRAITS 

who  had  patronized  it;  while  in  other  cases  his 
methods  were  less  justified  by  results. 

In  private  life  Bowles's  kindness  was  by  no 
means  confined  to  theory  or  sentiment.  There  is 
clear  record  of  many  deeds  of  broad  generosity 
and  covert  indication  of  many  more.  Perhaps  the 
most  touching  is  recorded  in  the  last  words  written 
by  him  to  his  wife,  before  sailing  for  Europe  in 
search  of  health,  when  money  was  none  too  abun- 
dant, and  other  prospects  were  dreary  enough: 

" has  just  come  in  to  say  good-bye.  He  will 

write  you.  He  accepts  our  offer.  I  am  very  glad 

of  it.  Now  send  him  and the  money  regularly, 

and  tell  nobody."  26 

There  are  little  kindnesses,  little  matters  of 
thoughtfulness,  which  often  mean  more  than 
money,  and  certainly  endear  more.  In  these 
Bowles  was  admirably  proficient,  because  he  had 
the  instinct  for  them.  And  there  is  no  occasion 
when  such  kindnesses  are  more  needed,  more  ap- 
preciated, and  more  difficult  than  during  travel. 
General  Walker,  an  admirable  judge,  who  was 
with  Bowles  for  some  months  in  England,  testifies 
to  his  exceptional  qualities  in  this  direction.  He 
was  always  thoughtful  of  others,  enjoyed  every 
minute  of  their  pleasures,  and  was  much  more 
anxious  to  discover  what  his  young  companions 
wished  to  see  than  to  see  anything  himself. 

In  short,  he  was  an  eminently  social  being. 
This  is  evident  from  the  first  page  of  his  biography 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  277 

to  the  last.  It  is  true  that  he  had  his  times  of  re- 
serve and  repression,  times  when  he  did  not  seem 
to  welcome  even  friends.  Such  times  must  come 
to  every  man  who  lives  a  busy,  eager,  crowded 
inner  life.  "Why,"  he  said  to  one  of  his  acquaint- 
ances, "why  don't  people  clap  me  on  the  shoulder, 
with  a  'How  are  you,  old  fellow/  as  they  do  you?" 
"Because,"  was  the  answer,  "you  go  along  with 

a  look  that  says,  '  Keep  away  from  me  —  d n 

you! ' "  26  But  the  very  pathos  of  the  query  shows 
a  longing  for  human  contact  and  fellowship  and 
intimacy,  and  this  pathetic  longing  is  especially 
apparent  in  Bowles's  exclamations  of  solitude  and 
loneliness  when  he  is  traveling  and  among  stran- 
gers. Busy  as  his  thoughts  were,  they  did  not  give 
him  sufficient  companionship.  If  he  had  a  delight- 
ful experience,  he  wanted  a  friend  to  share  it.  If 
he  had  a  bitter  experience,  he  wanted  a  friend  to 
take  away  the  sting. 

This  intense  human  interest  undoubtedly  served 
him  well  in  the  business  of  his  life.  Nobody 
profits  more  by  human  contact  than  the  journalist. 
To  Bowles  the  wide  world  was,  in  a  sense,  fodder 
for  his  paper.  He  talked  with  men  of  all  types  and 
occupations,  gathered  ideas  from  the  professor  and 
the  mechanic,  from  the  farmer  and  the  lawyer,  from 
the  fine  lady  and  the  ditch-digger  in  the  streets. 
He  carried  to  perfection  the  delicate  art  of  listen- 
ing and  knew  how  to  make  his  own  speech  serve  to 
elicit  the  speech  and  the  inmost  thought  of  others. 


278  UNION  PORTRAITS 

At  the  same  time,  in  doing  this  he  was  no  hypo- 
crite, did  not  seek  men's  company  with  any  cold  de- 
sign of  betraying  their  confidence,  did  not  scoff  at 
or  deride  them.  If  he  mingled  freely  and  widely  with 
his  fellows,  it  was  first  of  all  because  he  loved  to 
do  it,  loved  the  touch  of  the  human  hand  and  the 
sound  of  the  human  voice.  It  was  this  sponta- 
neous and  constant  humanity  which  made  his 
presence  so  widely  sought  in  all  societies.  Senator 
Dawes  wrote,  after  Bowles's  death:  "I  never  knew 
a  man  who  knew  him  who  would  n't  rather  have 
him  at  his  table  than  any  other  man  in  the 
world."  27 

Even  in  illness  and  decay,  when  most  of  us 
prefer  to  brood  alone  over  disappointment  and 
failure,  this  same  charming  social  instinct  found 
utterance  in  one  of  those  delightful  passages  which 
are  in  themselves  complete  lyric  poems:  "I  was 
sure  you  would  have  a  pleasant  summer  with  the 
Haskells.  They  are  dreadful  good  fellows,  both  of 
them.  But  I  couldn't  have  kept  up  with  your 
gait.  I  am  the  chap  for  'the  bank  where  the  wild 
thyme  grows/  with  one  other  fellow,  male  or 
female,  lying  in  the  sunshine,  picking  flowers  to 
pieces,  and  discoursing  on  the  frivolity  of  things 
we  cannot  do."  28 

The  distinction,  or  indistinction,  of  sex  in  this 
passage  is  characteristic;  for  among  Bowles's  mul- 
titude of  friends  there  were  many  women.  His 
relations  with  them  seem  to  have  been  wholly 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  279 

intellectual  and  I  see  no  reason  to  suppose  that 
Mrs.  Bowles  had  ever  any  cause  for  jealousy. 
But  his  quick,  light,  active  spirit  naturally  re- 
sponded to  a  woman's  gayety  and  sensitiveness, 
and  he  sought  them,  wanted  them,  missed  them. 
At  Baden-Baden  he  complains  that  "there  are  no 
women  to  chaff  with,  and  to  rub  your  mind  out  of 
its  morbidity."  29  None  of  his  letters  are  more 
varied,  more  charming,  more  full  of  fresh  and  vivid 
interest  than  those  he  writes  to  Miss  Whitney. 
At  one  moment  he  laughs  with  her  over  some 
trifle,  some  new  fashion  or  folly,  at  the  next  he  is 
discussing  the  future  of  democracy  or  the  welfare 
of  his  soul. 

It  appears  that  with  women  he  was  always  per- 
fectly easy  and  natural,  did  not  stand  in  awe  of 
them  or  regard  them  as  in  any  way  different. 
Says  one  lady  of  his  visits,  "He  used  to  come  in 
for  a  few  moments,  on  his  way  back  and  forth 
between  his  home  and  his  office,  and  would  per- 
haps sit  with  both  legs  hanging  over  the  arm  of  a 
chair,  his  hat  low  down  over  his  eyes,  and  talk 
sarse,  as  he  called  it."  30  Also,  he  did  not  abstain 
from  that  affectionate  criticism  which  one  sex 
always  feels  privileged  to  bestow  upon  the  other. 
"Women  are  fascinating  creatures;  yet  it  is  tread- 
ing upon  eggs  all  the  time  to  deal  with  them."  31 
And  again,  in  his  extraordinarily  careless,  vivid 
fashion:  "Traveling  with  women  sops  up  one's 
time  awfully."  32 


280  UNION  PORTRAITS 

But  we  have  the  testimony  of  the  most  intelli- 
gent men  and  women  both  that  this  ease  and  oc- 
casional apparent  flippancy  did  not  spring  from 
indifference  or  contempt.  "I  hardly  ever  saw  any 
one  give  just  the  sort  of  recognition  to  a  woman 
that  he  did/'  says  one  male  friend;  "treating  her 
as  an  intellectual  equal,  yet  with  a  kind  of  chival- 
rous deference,  suggested  rather  than  expressed."  33 
And  a  woman  has  rarely  paid  finer  tribute  to  a 
man  than  that  of  Miss  Brackett:  "Of  all  the  men 
I  have  ever  known,  he  was  the  only  one  who  never 
made  a  woman  feel  as  if  he  were  condescending  in 
thought  or  word  when  he  talked  to  her."  34 

ill 

I  have  not  meant  to  emphasize  Bowles's  social 
qualities  at  the  expense  of  his  intellectual,  for  it  is 
the  latter  that  make  him  most  interesting  now 
and  that  account  for  most  of  his  achievement, 
though  here  also  the  social  did  its  part.  He  was 
not  a  profound  or  elaborate  thinker  on  abstract 
questions,  did  not  pretend  to  be.  In  all  matters  of 
practical  morals  and  the  conduct  of  life  he  had 
very  energetic  and  decided  opinions  and  pro- 
claimed them  in  his  letters  and  in  his  paper,  per- 
haps not  always  logically  or  consistently,  but  al- 
ways with  a  manifest  intention  of  promoting  the 
good  in  the  world.  He  liked  to  preach  and  believed 
that  he  did  it  better  than  a  good  many  parsons,  in 
which  he  was  certainly  right.  "Nor  do  I  see  any 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  281 

other  line  of  influence  or  noble  effort  in  this  world 
except  in  behalf  of  ideals."35  What  could  be 
more  touching  or  more  significant  of  a  life  passed 
with  high  aims  than  his  last  words  to  Dawes: 
"Drop  on  your  knees,  Dawes,  and  thank  God 
that  you  have  done  a  little  good  in  the  world, 
and  ask  his  forgiveness  that  you  have  done  no 
more."  36 

Also,  as  time  served,  he  liked  to  wrestle  with 
great  spiritual  problems.  "Without  philosophy," 
he  wrote,  "there  is  vastly  little  of  life  but  a  pas- 
sion and  a  struggle." 37  The  long  letter  written  to 
Miss  Whitney  in  January,  1862,  is  an  intensely 
curious  analysis  of  religious  and  speculative  theo- 
ries, the  earnest  effort  of  a  mind  not  schooled  by 
abstract  thought  to  disentangle  the  complex  web 
of  human  longing  and  passion  and  despair.  Of 
almost  equal  interest  is  the  letter  to  Mrs.  Bowles 
expressing  a  humble  desire  to  conform  to  her  re- 
ligious observances,  even  when  he  could  not  him- 
self wholly  enter  into  them. 

Yet  the  attitude  generally  is  one  of  groping,  not 
a  sad  or  morbid  groping,  but  a  willingness  to  leave 
to  God  the  things  that  are  God's,  while  working 
day  and  night  at  the  task  which  God  has  set  us  to 
be  done  in  this  world.  The  whole  nature  of  the  man 
leaps  out  in  one  of  those  splendid  phrases  that  he 
had  the  secret  of  coining  [italics  mine]:  "It  is  com- 
forting to  people  with  free  and  vagrant  heads  to  feel 
that  there  is  even  a  Christianity  back  of  and  with- 


282  UNION  PORTRAITS 

out  Christ,  and  to  which  he  seems  rather  interpre- 
ter and  disciple  than  founder/' 38 

A  "free  and  vagrant  head"!  That  is  what  gives 
Bowles  much  of  his  charm,  and  he  himself  prized 
that  freedom  far  above  what  any  conventional 
education  could  have  given  him.  For  he  had  no 
academic  discipline,  and  very  little  of  school;  got 
what  learning  he  possessed  from  the  touch  of 
human  heads  and  hearts  and  the  careful  contem- 
plation of  his  own.  "His  lack  of  early  training 
was  never  compensated  by  self-culture  or  wise 
reflection/' 39  says  W.  P.  Garrison,  scornfully. 
This  is  far  too  severe.  At  the  same  time,  it  is 
curious  to  consider  that  a  man  who  was  all  his 
life  a  guide  to  the  public  through  written  words 
should  have  been  so  little  conversant  with  the 
written  words  of  others.  Bowles's  reading  was 
mainly  newspapers,  and  newspapers,  though  good 
seasoning,  are  not  very  substantial  diet  for  the 
intellect. 

Bowles  himself  was  keenly  aware  of  his  defi- 
ciencies. Indeed,  as  regards  style  and  literary 
qualities,  he  was  far  too  humble.  "The  book 
made  itself/'  he  says  of  one  of  his  volumes  of 
travel;  "it  is  a  newspaper  book;  I  am  a  newspaper 
writer,  and  not  a  book  writer;  and  I  don't  aspire 
to  be  other  than  I  am."  *°  Again:  "I  was  afraid 
you  would  think  it  [an  editorial]  a  little  over- 
wrought, and  not  low-toned  enough  for  the  sub- 
ject. That  is  where  I  err  always  in  my  work;  it 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  283 

gives  it  something  of  its  power  and  charm  with 
the  mass  of  readers;  it  loses  for  it  something  of 
the  impression  on  the  select  and  superior  few."  4l 
And  as  he  criticized  his  own  writing,  so  he  often 
lamented  his  lack  of  leisurely  reading,  of  wide 
contact  with  the  best  thought  and  experience  of 
humanity.  When  he  traveled  in  Europe,  art  meant 
little  to  him,  historical  association  meant  little  to 
him.  He  sighs  for  time  and  strength  to  think,  to 
adjust  himself  to  the  larger  current  of  the  world, 
to  get  out  of  the  mad,  exhausting  whirl  of  news, 
mere  news,  which  makes  the  passing  passions  of 
the  hour  seem  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  perma- 
nent interests  of  life.  Yet  even  in  these  longings, 
books,  the  distillation  of  human  activity,  do  not 
take  first  place.  "I  would  roam  about  the  world, 
studying  books  some,  nature  a  good  deal,  and  peo- 
ple and  institutions  more/' 42 

For  the  man  was  above  all  a  worker  and  liver. 
It  was  just  the  "free  and  vagrant  head"  that 
made  his  life  so  joyously  abundant  and  his  paper 
so  forcible.  His  intelligence  may  not  have  been 
profound,  but  it  was  splendid  in  its  vigor,  its 
energy,  its  variety,  its  speed.  How  direct  and 
frank  it  was,  profiting  by  its  very  self -training  to 
brush  away  old  convention  and  the  dry  bones  of 
formal  futility!  Has  he  to  congratulate  a  friend 
on  a  congressional  victory?43  "It  is  not  states- 
manship, and  you  know  it.  But  it  is  all  of  states- 
manship, I  frankly  admit,  that  the  present  Con- 


284  UNION  PORTRAITS 

gress  is  up  to."  Do  fools  torment  him  with  old 
saws  about  dead  reputations?  "I  hate  the  'Nti  de 
mortuis,'  etc.  What  do  men  die  for,  except  that 
posterity  may  impartially  judge,  and  get  the  full 
benefit  of  their  example?"  44 

So  in  his  business.  He  wanted  no  shirkers,  no 
drivelers,  no  fuss,  no  make-believe.  He  exacted 
work,  faithful,  earnest,  driving  work.  He  was  in 
a  sense  a  severe  taskmaster,  having  sharp  reproof 
at  his  command,  when  necessary,  not  in  stormy 
verbosity,  but  in  just  the  word  or  two  that  find 
a  joint  and  put  a  barb  in  it.  He  insisted  upon 
exactness,  nicety,  finish,  and  set  a  high  standard 
of  mechanical  production  in  days  when  there  were 
fewer  facilities  than  at  present. 

But  he  knew  how  to  make  work  easy,  so  far  as 
it  ever  can  be.  His  office  was  systematized.  Each 
man  had  his  task,  was  taught  how  and  when  to  do  it 
and  by  whom  it  was  to  be  supervised  and  criticized 
when  done.  And  if  the  chief  could  reprove,  he 
could  also  encourage.  Sharp  words  were  lightened 
by  a  touch  of  the  quick,  sympathetic  humor  that 
was  natural  to  him.  Words  of  praise  were  rare, 
but  they  meant  something  when  they  came,  and 
power  of  achievement  in  any  special  line  was 
quickly  discerned  and  energetically  supported. 

Moreover,  work  was  urged  on  by  the  most 
powerful  stimulus  of  all,  example.  This  was  no 
man  to  set  wheels  a-going  and  then  watch  them 
whirl  at  his  leisure.  From  his  journeyman  days 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  285 

to  the  last  minute  when  work  was  possible,  and 
longer,  he  labored  with  all  that  was  in  him.  "What 
with  forty-two  hours'  continuous  work  Tuesday 
and  Wednesday  and  Thursday,  without  sleep,  and 
getting  over  it,  I  had  not  time  to  write  to  you,"  is 
one  of  his  casual,  significant  comments.46  Work 
was  his  life,  writes  one  who  knew  him  intimately. 
We  have  seen  the  depth  of  his  domestic  affection. 
Yet  in  a  sense  it  would  be  just  to  say  that  for  thirty 
years  the  "Springfield  Republican"  was  wife  and 
child  and  food  and  sleep  to  him.  It  certainly 
robbed  him  of  any  complete  enjoyment  of  all  these 
things,  though  it  also  made  his  enjoyment  of  them 
keener.  Even  his  recreation  had  usually  storm  and 
fury  in  it.  He  liked  a  horse,  but  he  cared  nothing 
for  looks  or  pedigree.  What  he  wanted  was  speed. 
An  acquaintance,  who  had  studied  this  phase,  said 
of  him,  "He  was  fonder  of  reckless  driving  than 
any  man  I  ever  knew."  46  Then,  though  rarely, 
he  would  relax  and  drop  into  absolute  quiescence. 
As  he  lay  one  afternoon  on  the  piazza,  with  the 
apple-blossoms  blowing  over  him,  he  murmured, 
"This,  I  guess,  is  as  near  heaven  as  we  shall  ever 
get  in  this  life." 47 

For,  as  you  see,  he  was  a  mere  bundle  of  nerves, 
the  quintessence  of  our  sun-and-wind-driven  New 
England  temperament,  whose  life  is  work,  whose 
death  is  work,  whose  heaven  is  work,  whatsoever 
other  heaven  we  may  dream  of.  You  may  read  it 
written  on  his  spare,  energetic  figure,  on  his  sensi- 


286  UNION  PORTRAITS 

tive,  strained,  wistful  forehead,  above  all,  in  his 
intense  and  eager  eyes.  It  was  the  quick,  respon- 
sive nerves  that  enabled  him  to  do  the  work  he 
did,  that  gave  him  passionate  joys  and  passion- 
ate sorrows.  Even  when  the  nerves  are  disordered 
and  tormenting,  he  recognizes  their  value  with 
wonderfully  subtle  analysis.  "  There  is  a  certain 
illumination  with  the  disorder  that  is  enchanting 
at  times."  48  He  is  determined  that  they  shall  be 
his  servants,  not  his  masters.  Now  he  lays  whip 
and  spur  to  them,  forces  them  to  do  and  overdo, 
till  a  set  task  is  accomplished.  Again  he  restrains 
them,  lives  by  rule  and  system,  makes  schedules 
of  food,  schedules  of  hours.  These  exuberant  sen- 
sibilities are  splendid  things,  so  you  control  them. 
"Sympathies  and  passions  are  greater  elements  of 
power  than  he  [a  friend]  admits.  All  they  want  is 
to  have  judgment  equal  to  and  directing  them. 
No  matter  how  powerful,  how  acute  they  are  — 
the  more  so  the  better.  But  sympathies  and  pas- 
sions that  run  away  with  us  are  oftener  a  curse 
than  a  blessing."  49  He  thinks  he  has  controlled 
them,  declares  he  has.  "You  must  remember  I 
have  necessarily  schooled  myself  to  coolness  and 
philosophy,  and  to  the  look  ahead.  Otherwise  my 
life  would  have  killed  me  years  ago."  60 

But  such  control,  especially  when  carried  be- 
yond the  normal,  is  a  wearing,  exhausting  process 
and  is  sure  in  the  end  to  bring  a  penalty.  Bowles, 
with  his  "look  ahead,"  knew  this  perfectly  well 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  287 

and  faced  it  always.  When  a  friend  warned  him 
of  what  was  inevitably  coming,  he  answered  with 
these  striking  words:  "I  know  it  just  as  well  as 
you  do.  When  my  friends  point  out  that  I  am 
working  toward  a  breakdown,  they  seem  to  think 
that  is  to  influence  my  action.  Not  at  all!  I 
have  got  the  lines  drawn,  the  current  flowing,  and 
by  throwing  my  weight  here  now,  I  can  count  for 
something.  If  I  make  a  long  break  or  parenthesis, 
to  get  strong,  I  shall  lose 'my  chance.  No  man 
is  living  a  life  that  is  worth  living,  unless  he  is 
willing  to  die  for  somebody  or  something,  —  at 
least  to  die  a  little." 61 

Admirable  words,  and  perhaps  wise,  though  not 
for  all,  nor  at  all  times.  Dying  a  little  is  not  always 
conveniently  managed  at  discretion,  nor  even 
dying  a  great  deal.  And  Bowles's  disregard  and 
positive  abuse  of  his  nerves  not  only  killed  him  at 
fifty-two,  but  caused  him  and  all  who  loved  him 
infinite  distress  and  misery  before  that  time.  He 
perfectly  understood  the  cause  of  his  troubles: 
"My  will  has  carried  me  for  years  beyond  my 
mental  and  physical  power;  that  has  been  the 
offending  rock."  52  Again:  "Nobody  knows  how 
I  have  abused  my  brain  but  myself,  and  I  there- 
fore ought  to  be  the  most  patient  with  its  mal- 
adies." 53 

But  to  know  the  cause  and  to  find  the  cure  are 
far,  far  different.  Therefore,  from  a  very  early 
stage,  his  life  was  made  up  alternately  of  extrava- 


288  UNION  PORTRAITS 

gant  effort  at  home  to  do  more  than  he  or  any  one 
man  could  do,  and  then  of  forced  change  and  travel 
to  procure  that  renovation  which  could  only  come, 
or  could  at  any  rate  come  far  better,  from  within, 
by  the  acquired  habit  of  repose. 

Repose,  peace,  and  the  tranquil  sleep  that  should 
go  with  them — these  were  the  remedies,  the  bless- 
ings that  Bowles  sought  far  and  wide,  up  and 
down,  for  thirty  years.  He  told  Mr.  Howells  in 
Venice  that  he  was  sleeping  only  one  hour  out  of 
the  twenty-four.  Sometimes  he  slept  more  than 
that,  but  he  never  slept  enough.  Modern  medical 
methods  might  have  helped  him  a  little.  The  ad- 
vice he  had  was  well  meant,  but  now  sounds 
strange.  "  Kill  a  horse,  and  it  will  do  you  good."  54 
He  might  have  killed  a  dozen  horses,  but  black 
care  would  none  the  less  have  buzzed  and  snarled 
about  his  ears. 

Peace!  Peace!  Not  Clarendon's  Falkland  could 
more  longingly  ingeminate  the  word.  Perhaps 
Bowles  knew  so  little  about  it  that  he  overesti- 
mated its  blessings.  "I  never  saw  in  his  face," 
said  a  friend,  "the  expression  of  repose  —  the 
look  was  always  of  fire  or  tire"; 55  but  even  Clar- 
endon wrote  few  things  more  striking  than  this 
paragraph  on  peace  in  heaven,  though  the  quality 
is  not  Clarendon's.  "I  wonder  if  we  shall  have 
such  weather  in  heaven!  whether  or  no  we  go  — 
whether  or  no  such  weather.  But  if  the  world 
lives  much  longer  it  will  have  abolished  all  these 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  289 

notions  of  its  youth.  The  Unitarians  came,  and 
abolished  hell;  Parker  came,  Higginson  stays,  to 
abolish  Christ;  the  next  conceited  set  of  upstarts, 
inventing  a  new  elixir  of  life,  out  of  gin  and  juniper 
berries,  will  probably  supersede  heaven,  or  bring 
it  down  to  earth.  But  that  is  what  the  rest  of  us 
dream  of  doing  —  but  it  can't  be  done  so  long  as 
nerves  thrill  and  stomachs  labor.  No  elixir  of  love, 
or  gin,  can  make  heaven,  with  neuralgia  playing 
on  the  fiddles  of  the  orchestra,  and  dyspepsia 
groaning  through  the  grim  trombone.  Give  it  up. 
I  think  I  will  stick  to  the  original  heaven  as  a 
thing  more  sure."  56 

Nerves  so  thoroughly  and  constantly  jangled 
could  not  fail  to  produce  some  unfortunate  results 
in  practical  life.  However  perfect  the  control,  there 
was  irritability  that  would  break  forth  at  times. 
Bowles  often  refers  to  being  thoroughly  cross  and 
out  of  sorts,  sometimes  in  a  mood  of  discourage- 
ment, sometimes  with  his  whimsical  grace  and 
fancy.  Others  refer  to  it  also.  In  his  home,  with 
those  he  cherished,  breaks  of  temper  seem  to  have 
been  rare;  but  in  his  office,  though  he  was  much 
admired  and  much  beloved,  he  was  regarded  with 
a  good  deal  of  awe  also. 

And  the  jangled  nerves  brought  hours  of  depres- 
sion and  temporary  hopelessness.  He  sometimes 
refers  to  these,  expressing  them  with  his  really 
wonderful  gift  of  telling  phraseology:  "I  did  not 
mount  my  great  heights  of  abandon;  perhaps  it 


290  UNION  PORTRAITS 

is  better  described  in  your  own  sad  words  as  a 
'wise  despair."9  57  Take,  again,  this  passage  of 
extraordinary  self-analysis,  written  to  Mrs.  Bowles, 
and  doubly  striking  from  a  man  so  schooled  by 
persistent  discipline  to  courage  and  hope:  "Mary, 
don't  let  my  fretful,  downcast  moods  annoy  you. 
They  are  unworthy  of  me,  and  I  ought  to  rise 
above  them,  and  control  them.  But  sometimes 
they  master  and  overpower  me.  I  want  to  give  it 
all  up  sometimes.  Nobody  can  understand  the 
spell  that  is  upon  me.  It  cannot  be  described  —  it 
does  n't  seem  as  if  anybody  else  can  ever  feel  it. 
Consider  me  if  you  can  as  a  little  child,  sick  and 
peevish,  wanting  love  and  indulgence  and  petting 
and  rest  and  peace.  There,  this  ought  not  to  have 
been  written.  But  it  can't  be  unwritten,  and  it  is 
too  late  to  write  anything  else.  It  is  morbid;  but 
there's  truth,  sometimes  the  clearest,  in  our  morbid 
reflections.  Health  is  too  often  independence, 
selfish  philosophy,  and  indifference."  58 

Also,  worn  nerves  bring  not  only  general  de- 
pression and  discouragement,  but  a  bitter  sense  of 
tasks  unaccomplished  and  vast  hopes  unrealized. 
This  impression  of  f ailure  or  of  uncompleted  effort 
was  most  keenly  felt  by  Bowles.  He  was  a  man 
with  more  than  the  common  human  passion  for 
success.  He  could  not  bear  to  have  other  men 
defeat  him.  He  could  not  bear  to  have  chance  or 
cross  accident  defeat  him.  To  have  his  own  nerves 
defeat  him  was  humiliation  hardly  to  be  described. 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  291 

He  loved  power,  he  loved  domination,  he  loved 
mastery. 

No  one  appreciated  more  broadly  than  he  the 
immense  power  that  is  given  to  the  modern  news- 
paper, and  it  was  for  this  reason,  more  than  for 
any  other,  that  he  loved  newspaper  work.  In  his 
own  office  he  was  absolute  master,  not  a  tyrant 
certainly,  but  in  a  quiet,  determined,  final  fashion 
the  one  sole  authority  on  little  and  great  affairs. 

In  this  love  of  power  lay  unquestionably  Bowles's 
weakness.  The  most  marked  failure  of  his  life  was 
his  attempt  to  transfer  his  activity  from  the 
"  Republican"  to  the  "Boston  Traveller,"  in  1857. 
Various  explanations  were  sought  for  this.  Various 
elements  no  doubt  entered  into  it.  But  a  consider- 
able element  was  the  man's  own  autocratic  and 
imperious  disposition.  W.  P.  Garrison's  theory, 
that  he  undertook  the  task  "with  a  bumptiousness 
that  at  once  made  him  the  laughing-stock  of  his 
esteemed  contemporaries,"  59  is  much  too  harsh, 
but  it  suggests  substantial  truth,  nevertheless. 

So,  in  the  conduct  of  his  own  paper,  he  was  too 
inclined  to  assert  his  personal  views  and  feelings, 
for  the  pure  pleasure  of  it.  Independence  in  politics 
and  religion  is  a  difficult  and  dangerous  path  to 
follow,  and  an  editor  in  absolute  control  is  apt  to 
mistake  whim  for  pure  reason  and  the  rejection  of 
others'  judgment  for  the  assertion  of  his  own.  If 
I  quote  Garrison's  "Nation"  review  yet  again,  it 
is  because  there  is  a  certain  malicious  pleasure  in 


UNION  PORTRAITS 

watching  the  editors  of  these  two  great  journals, 
whose  work  was  in  some  ways  similar,  criticize 
each  other  as  they  criticized  all  the  rest  of  the 
world.  Garrison,  then,  says  "the  sort  of  inde- 
pendence which  Mr.  Bowles  gradually  achieved 
consisted  in  making  a  fetich  of  his  journal"; 60  and 
he  again  characterizes  Bowles's  effort  as  "the 
evasion  of  personal  responsibility  under  the  guise 
of  a  highly  virtuous  independence."  61  When  the 
critic  of  the  "Nation"  penned  this  and  the  other 
amenities  I  have  before  cited,  he  had  just  had  be- 
fore his  eyes  the  following  from  one  of  Bowles's 
letters:  "The  'Nation'  has  become  a  permanent 
and  proud  addition  to  American  journalism.  Often 
conceited  and  priggish;  coldly  critical  to  a  degree 
sometimes  amusing,  and  often  provoking;  and 
singularly  lacking,  not  only  in  a  generous  enthusi- 
asm of  its  own,  but  in  any  sympathy  with  that  great 
American  quality,  by  which  alone  we  as  a  people 
are  led  on  to  our  efforts  and  our  triumphs  in  the 
whole  arena  of  progress;  the  paper  yet  shows  such 
vigor  and  integrity  of  thought,  such  moral  inde- 
pendence of  party,  such  elevation  of  tone,  and 
such  wide  culture,  as  to  demand  our  great  respect 
and  secure  our  hearty  praise."  62 

But  if  Bowles's  criticism  had  some  justice  in  it, 
so  also  had  Garrison's.  Bowles's  own  biographer 
admits  that  he  was  too  ready  to  sacrifice  friend- 
ship to  what  he  considered  duty,  and  that  he  freely 
found  fault  in  his  paper  with  those  whom  he  loved 


SAMUEL  BOWLES  293 

and  by  whom  he  wished  to  be  loved  in  private  life. 
And  have  we  not  Bowles's  own  personal  testimony 
on  the  subject,  none  the  less  forcible  for  being 
half  jocose?  "I  mean  to  be  as  loyal  as  possible, 
and  that  isn't  very  loyal;  for  you  know  I  do  love 
to  find  fault  and  grumble,  and  thank  God  I  can 
afford  to."  63  But  who  of  us  can  really  afford  to 
grumble  and  find  fault? 

Yet  what  finer  witness  can  there  be  to  character 
than  the  great  love  that  surrounded  this  man,  in 
spite  of  his  fault-finding?  Those  whom  he  attacked 
publicly  resented  it  for  a  while,  but  once  they  met 
him  they  forgot  it.  He  had  the  art  of  making  men 
forget  everything  except  his  charm.  All  his  life  he 
fought  Ben  Butler.  Yet,  whenever  they  met,  they 
swapped  jokes  and  stories.  When  Bowles  was  on 
his  deathbed,  he  received  from  Butler  a  letter  of 
sympathy  and  good  wishes,  and  almost  his  last 
words  were,  "Write  to  thank  General  Butler,  and 
say  that  while  Mr.  Bowles  has  always  differed  from 
him  in  politics,  he  has  never  failed  to  recognize  his 
high  qualities,  and  to  appreciate  his  many  personal 
attractions."  64  Senator  Dawes  suffered  repeatedly 
from  the  strictures  of  the  "Republican";  yet  he 
declared  that  he  loved  its  editor  more  than  any 
one  outside  of  his  own  family.65  A  member  of  the 
editorial  staff,  who  had  been  a  witness  of  many 
sharp  rebuffs,  confesses,  "I  almost  worshiped  him. 
There  was  more  religion  in  my  feeling  toward  him 
than  in  almost  anything  else  in  me."  66  But  most 


294  UNION  PORTRAITS 

touching  of  all  is  the  exclamation  commonly 
heard  among  his  humble  neighbors  in  the  city  of 
Springfield,  "I  am  so  sorry  Sam  Bowles  is  going 
to  die."  67 

He  was  a  striking  and  most  sympathetic  type  of 
journalist,  and  the  journalist  is  interesting  because 
he  came  into  the  world  only  a  hundred  years  ago 
and  seems  likely  to  play  an  increasingly  great  part 
in  it.  Certainly  no  one  who  has  followed  our  own 
Civil  War  in  the  newspapers  can  fail  to  feel  the 
singular  and  important  position  they  then  occu- 
pied. If  the  war  itself  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  great 
tragic  drama,  the  newspapers  almost  precisely  per- 
form the  function  of  the  Greek  tragic  chorus. 
They  comment  abstractly,  yet  with  trembling 
eagerness,  upon  the  conduct  and  motives  of  the 
actors,  they  intervene  often  indiscreetly  and  with 
doubly  tragic  consequence,  they  prophesy  with 
pathetic  or  ludicrous  incapacity  of  vision,  above 
all  they  reflect,  from  moment  to  moment,  like  a 
sensitized  surface,  the  long,  unwieldy,  enormous 
ebb  and  flow  of  events  and  passions  and  desires  of 
which  no  man  can  really  divine  the  end. 


THE  END 


NOTES 


TITLES  OF  BOOKS  MOST  FREQUENTLY  CITED, 
SHOWING   ABBREVIATIONS  USED 


Battles  and  Leaders  of  the  Civil  War. 

BIGELOW,  JOHN,  Retrospections  of  an 
Active  Life,  5  vols. 

BIQELOW,  MAJOR  JOHN,  The  Cam- 
paign of  Chancellorsville. 

CHASE,  SALMON  P.,  Diary  and  Corre- 
spondence, in  Annual  Report  of 
American  Historical  Association, 
1902,  vol.  n. 

Conduct  of  the  War,  Report  of  the  Joint 
Committee  on,  8  vols. 

Cox,  JACOB  D.,  Military  Reminis- 
cences of  the  Civil  War,  2  vols. 

FLOWER,  F.  A.,  Edward  McMasters 
Stanton. 

GORHAM,  GEORGE  C.,  Life  and  Public 
Services  of  Edwin  McMasters  Stanton. 

GRANT,  U.  S.,  Personal  Memoirs  of, 
2  vols. 

KEYES,  E.  M.,  Fifty  Years'  Recollection 
of  Men  and  Events. 

LIVERMORE,  WILLIAM  ROSCOE,  The 
Story  of  the  Civil  War  (continua- 
tion of  Ropes). 

LONGFELLOW,  SAMUEL,  Life  of  Henry 
Wadsworth  Longfellow,  3  vols. 

MCCLELLAN,  GEORGE  B.,  McClellan's 
Own  Story. 

MEADE,  GEORGE,  The  Life  and  Letters 
of  General  George  Gordon  Meade,  2 
vols. 

MERRIAM,  GEORGE  S.,  The  Life  and 
Times  of  Samuel  Bowles. 

MICHIE,  PETER  S.,  General  MoClellan. 

The  Military  Historical  Society  of  Mas- 
sachusetts, Papers,  collected. 

NICOLAY,  JOHN  G.,  and  HAY,  JOHN, 
Abraham  Lincoln,  A  History,  10  vols. 


B.  &L. 

Bigelow 

Bigelow,  Chancellor smllt 

Chase 

Conduct  of  the  War 

Cox 

Flower 

Gorham 

Grant 

Keyes 

Livermore 
Longfellow 
O.  S. 

Meade 

Merriam 
Michie 

M .  H.  S.  of  M. 
N.  &H. 


298 


NOTES 


Official  Records  of  the  Union  and  Con- 
federate Armies  (130  volumes  re- 
ferred to  by  serial  numbers,  Arabic). 

PIATT,  DONN,  General  George  H. 
Thomas,  with  concluding  chapters  by 
Henry  V.  Boynton. 

PIERCE,  EDWARD  L.,  Memoir  and  Let- 
ters of  Charles  Sumner,  4  vols. 

PORTER,  HORACE,  Campaigning  with 
Grant. 

RHODES,  JAMES  FORD,  A  History  of  the 
United  States  from  the  Compromise  of 
1850. 

ROPES,  JOHN  C.,  The  Story  of  the  Civil 
War. 

RUSLING,  JAMES  F.,  Men  and  Things  I 
saw  in  the  Civil  War. 

SCHOFIELD,  JOHN  M.,  Forty-Six  Years 
in  the  Army. 

SEWARD,  FREDERICK,  The  Autobiog- 
raphy of  William  H.  Seward,  with  a 
Memoir  of  his  Life  and  Selections 
from  his  Letters  from  1831  to  1846. 

SEWARD,  FREDERICK,  Seward  at  Wash- 
ington, 2  vols. 

SEWARD,  WILLIAM  H.,  Works,  5  vols. 

SHANKS,  W.  F.  G.,  Personal  Recollec- 
tions of  Distinguished  Generals. 

SHERMAN,  WILLIAM  T.,  Home  Letters , 
edited  by  M.  A.  De Wolfe  Howe. 

SHERMAN,  Letters,  The. 

SHERMAN,  WILLIAM  T.,  Personal  Mem- 
oirs of,  2  vols. 

STANTON,  HENRY  B.,  Random  Recol- 
lections. 

SUMNER,  CHARLES,  Works,  15  vols. 

WELLES,  GIDEON,  Diary,  3  vols. 

YOUNG,  J.  R.,  Around  the  World  with 
General  Grant. 


O.R. 

Piatt 
Pierce 
Horace  Porter 

Rhodes,  U.S. 
Ropes 
Rusling 
Schofield 

Seward,  Life,  I 

Seward,  Life,  n,  in 
Seward,  Works 

Shanks 

Sherman,  Home  Letters 
Sherman,  Letters 

Sherman,  Memoir* 

H.  B.  Stanton 
Sumner,  Works 
Welles 

Young 


NOTES 

CHAPTER  I:  GEORGE  BRINTON  McCLELLAN 

1.  Diary,  October  13,  1860. 

2.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  244. 

3.  O.  S.,  p.  173. 

4.  O.  R.,  vol.  12,  p.  74. 

5.  Alexander  K.  McClure,  Recolkctions  of  Half  a  Century, 
p.  316. 

6.  O.  S.,  p.  57. 

7.  G.  S.  Hillard,  Life  and  Campaigns  of  General  McClellan, 
p.  35. 

8.  O.  S.,  p.  98. 

9.  O.  S.,  p.  56. 

10.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  n,  p.  548. 

11.  O.  S.,  p.  105. 

12.  O.  S.,  p.  35. 

13.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  I,  p.  359. 

14.  J.  Scheibert,  Der  Burgerkrieg  in  den  nordamericanischen 
Staaten,  p.  39. 

15.  0.  R.,  vol.  2,  p.  197. 

16.  O.  S.,  p.  538. 

17.  The  most  recent  of  McClellan's  apologists,  Mr.  I.  W. 
Heysinger,  in  his  book,  Antietam  and  the  Maryland  and 
Virginia  Campaigns,  attempts  to  prove  that  McClellan's 
estimates  of  his  opponents'  numbers  were  more  nearly 
correct  than  is  usually  supposed.  On  this  point  I  have 
consulted  Colonel  T.  L.  Livermore,  the  best  authority, 
who  assures  me  that  Heysinger's  figures  are  entirely 
unreliable. 

18.  To  Halleck,  O.  R.,  vol.  28,  p.  312. 

19.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  n,  p.  160. 

20.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  II,  p.  186. 


300  NOTES 

21.  O.  R.,  vol.  14,  p.  299. 

22.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  n,  p.  546. 

23.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  I,  p.  580. 

24.  O.  S.,  p.  612. 

25.  O.  R.,  vol.  28,  p.  281. 

26.  O.  S.,  p.  83. 

27.  O.  S.,  p.  613. 

28.  O.  S.,  p.  27. 

29.  O.  R.,  vol.  9,  p.  392. 

30.  Ibid. 

31.  0.  5.,  p.  652. 

32.  Key  to  Piatt,  in  Bonn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who 
Saved  the  Union,  p.  294. 

33.  O.  S.,  p.  85. 

34.  O.  R.,  vol.  2,  p.  288. 

35.  O.  5.,  p.  617. 

36.  O.  5.,  p.  308. 

37.  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  x,  p.  104. 

38.  To  Halleck,  O.  R.,  vol.  14,  p.  8. 

39.  O.  S.t  p.  137. 

40.  Ibid. 

41.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  II,  p.  438. 

42.  O.  S.,  p.  71. 

43.  O.  S.,  p.  608. 

44.  McClellan's  Last  Service  to  the  People  Together  with  a 
Tribute  to  his  Memory,  p.  27. 

45.  G.  S.  Hillard,  Life  and  Campaigns  of  General  McClellan, 
p.  331. 

46.  A.  L.  Long,  Memoirs  of  Robert  E.  Lee,  p.  233. 

47.  In  Curtis,  Last  Service,  as  above,  p.  126. 

48.  Young,  vol.  n,  p.  217. 

49.  F.  W.  Palfrey,  The  Antietam  and  Fredericksburg,  p.  135. 

50.  Adam  Gurowski,  Diary,  October  6,  1861. 

51.  W.  H.  Russell,  Diary,  September  25,  1861. 

52.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  I,  p.  575. 

53.  Gorham,  vol.  II,  p.  21. 

54.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  345. 


NOTES  301 

55.  W.  Swinton,  Campaigns  of  the  Army  of  the  Potomac, 
p.  228. 

56.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  n,  p.  685. 

57.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  253. 

58.  U.S.,  vol.  IV,  p.  109. 

59.  O.  S.,  p.  450. 

60.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  II,  p.  161. 

61.  O.  S.,  p.  453. 

62.  N.  &  H.,  vol.  VI,  p.  23. 

63.  O.  S.,  p.  196. 

64.  To  Secretary  of  War,  O.  R.>  vol.  5,  p.  11. 

65.  O.  S.,  p.  18. 

66.  Michie,  p.  454. 

67.  O.  S.,  p.  488. 

68.  G.  T.  Curtis,  Life,  Character,  and  Public  Services  of 
General  George  B.  McCkllan,  p.  97. 

69.  Francis  A.  Walker,  The  History  of  the  Second  Army 
Corps,  p.  138. 

70.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  II,  p.  551. 

CHAPTER  II:  JOSEPH  HOOKER 

1.  Conversation  with  Captain  Isaac  P.  Gragg. 

2.  Francis  A.  Walker,  General  Hancock,  p.  73. 

3.  Bigelow,  Chancellorsville,  p.  4. 

4.  W.  F.  G.  Shanks,  in  Harper's  Magazine,  vol.  31,  p.  640. 

5.  Ibid. 

6.  The  man  who  did  it,  in  Bigelow,  Chancellorsville,  p.  6. 

7.  Rusling,  p.  53. 

8.  Rusling,  p.  63. 

9.  Rusling,  p.  66. 

10.  The  Equestrian  Statue  of  Major  General  Joseph  Hooker, 
p.  164. 

11.  To  Williams,  September  12,  1862,  0.  R.,  vol.  28,  p.  273. 

12.  Report  on  Antietam,  0.  R.,  vol.  27,  p.  219. 

13.  O.  R.,  vol.  5,  p.  636. 

14.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  I,  p.  667. 


302  NOTES 

15.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  I,  p.  668. 

16.  A.  J.  Fremantle,  Three  Months  in  the  Southern  States, 
p.  31. 

17.  F.  W.  Palfrey,   The  Antietam  and  Fredericksburg,  p.  55. 

18.  O.  R.t  vol.  76,  p.  857. 

19.  In  Recollections  of  Half  a  Century,  by  Alexander  K.  Mc- 
Clure,  p.  348. 

20.  O.  R.,  vol.  53,  p.  223. 

21.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  I,  p.  577. 

22.  W.  F.  G.  Shanks,  in  Harper's  Magazine,  vol.  31,  p.  642. 

23.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  I,  p.  575. 

24.  Henry  Villard,  Memoirs,  vol.  I,  p.  348. 

25.  To  Stanton,  April  23,  1863,  O.  R.,  vol.  40,  p.  855. 

26.  O.  R.,  vol.  45,  p.  966. 

27.  Diary,  p.  91. 

28.  N.  &  H.,  quoted  in  Bigelow,  Chancellorsville,  p.  10. 

29.  R.  de  Trobriand,  Four  Years  with  the  Army  of  the  Po- 
tomac, p.  414. 

30.  O.  R.,  vol.  39,  p.  171. 

31.  In  Bigelow,  Chancellorsville,  p.  108. 

32.  Quoted  by  Sumner,  in  Welles,  vol.  I,  p.  336. 

33.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  m,  p.  161. 

34.  Livermore,  p.  211. 

35.  Major  Huntington  in  M.  H.  S.  ofM.,  vol.  in,  p.  191. 

36.  Rusling,  p.  15. 

37.  O.  R.,  vol.  39,  p.  171. 

38.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  m,  p.  223. 

39.  To  Wade,  April  2,  1864,  O.  R.,  vol.  109,  p.  540. 

40.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  iv,  p.  136. 

41.  Conduct  of  the  War,  vol.  iv,  p.  149. 

42.  J.  L.  Butterfield,  A  Biographical  Memoir  of  General 
Daniel  Butterfield,  p.  332. 

43.  0.  R.,  vol.  43,  p.  30. 

44.  C.  F.  Benjamin,  in  B.  &  L.,  vol.  Ill,  p.  241. 

45.  O.  R.,  vol.  107,  p.  1071. 

46.  O.  R.,  vol.  54,  p.  72. 

47.  To  Reynolds,  0.  JR.,  vol.  55,  p.  120. 


NOTES  303 

48.  0.  K.,  vol.  54,  p.  73. 

49.  O.  O.  Howard,  Autobiography,  vol.  I,  p.  460. 
60.  J.  H.  Wilson,  Life  of  Charles  A.  Dana,  p.  278. 

51.  O.  R.,  vol.  55,  p.  325. 

52.  O.  R.,  vol.  58,  p.  315. 

53.  Young,  vol.  II,  p.  306. 

54.  O.  R.,  vol.  55,  p.  339. 

55.  O.  R.,  vol.  58,  p.  467. 

56.  0.  R.t  vol.  55,  p.  344. 

57.  O.  R.,  vol.  54,  p.  95. 

58.  M.  H.  S.  ofM.,  vol.  vm,  p.  420. 

59.  0.  R.,  vol.  55,  p.  340. 

60.  J.  L.  Butterfield,  Biographical  Memoir  of  General  Daniel 
Butterfield,  p.  147. 

61.  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  vm,  p.  449. 

62.  O.  R.,  vol.  93,  p.  1011,  p.  1034. 

63.  Letter  to  LeDuc,  February  24, 1874,  in  Bigelow,  Chancel" 
lorsville,  p.  277. 

64.  Letter  of  Major  Halstead,  in  Bigelow,  Chancellorsvilk, 
p.  478. 

65.  John  Hay,  quoted  by  W.  R.  Thayer,  in  Harper's  Maga- 
zine, December,  1914,  p.  98. 

CHAPTER  III:  GEORGE  GORDON  MEADE 

1.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  99. 

2.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  41. 

3.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  311. 

4.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  128. 

5.  Meade,  vol.  n,  p.  178. 

6.  Meade,  vol.  II,  p.  300. 

7.  Meade,  vol.  n,  p.  234. 

8.  Meade,  vol.  n,  p.  183. 

9.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  140. 

10.  Young,  vol.  n,  p.  299. 

11.  Meade,  vol.  n,  p.  158. 

12.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  361. 


304  NOTES 

13.  Meade,  vol.  n,  p.  243. 

14.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  181. 

15.  Livermore,  p.  495. 

16.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  162. 

17.  O.  R.,  vol.  49,  p.  332. 

18.  O.  R.,  vol.  49,  p.  333. 

19.  Quoted  by  Walker,  in  B.  &  L.,  vol.  Ill,  p.  412. 

20.  O.  R.,  vol.  48,  p.  18. 

21.  Meade,  vol.  II,  p.  210. 

22.  Meade,  vol.  II,  p.  154. 

23.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  351. 

24.  Livermore,  p.  495. 

25.  J.  L.  Butterfield,  Biographical  Memoir  of  General  Daniel 
Butterfield,  p.  128. 

26.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  35.  The  chronology  in  this  quotation 
seems  a  little  peculiar,  but  Meade  is  speaking  freely,  in 
1845,  of  the  time  that  had  elapsed  since  his  entrance 
into  West  Point,  in  1831. 

27.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  32. 

28.  J.  W.  Jones,  Life  and  Letters  of  General  Robert  E.  Lee, 
p.  208. 

29.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  67. 

30.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  317. 

31.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  349. 

32.  Morris  Schaff,  Battle  of  the  Wilderness,  p.  42. 

33.  Young,  vol.  n,  p.  299. 

34.  Morris  Schaff,  Battle  of  the  Wilderness,  p.  41. 

35.  O.  R.,  vol.  80,  p.  142. 

36.  O.  R.,  vol.  80,  p.  143. 

37.  Horace  Porter,  Campaigning  with  Grant,  p.  248. 

38.  Morris  Schaff,  Battle  of  the  Wilderness,  p.  40. 

39.  Philip  Sheridan,  Personal  Memoirs,  vol.  I,  p.  368. 

40.  O.  R.,  vol.  43,  p.  109. 

41.  Meade,  vol.  n,  p.  202. 

42.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  38. 

43.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  241. 

44.  Meade,  vol.  II,  p.  229. 


NOTES  305 

45.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  219. 

46.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  315. 

47.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  316. 

48.  Meade,  vol.  I,  p.  277. 

49.  Meade,  vol.  II,  p.  271. 

CHAPTER  IV:   GEORGE  HENRY  THOMAS 

1.  J.  W.  Jones,  Life  and  Letters  of  General  Robert  E.  Lee, 
p.  121. 

2.  Ibid. 

3.  Ibid. 

4.  William  Jeans,  Parliamentary  Reminiscences,  p.  5. 

5.  Henry  Coppee,  General  Thomas,  p.  27. 

6.  T.  B.  Van  Home,  Life  of  Major-General  George  H. 
Thomas,  p.  25. 

7.  Quoted  by  Captain  W.  Gordon  McCabe,  in  Saturday 
Review,  April  13,  1912,  from  Richmond  Dispatch,  April 
23,  1870. 

8.  Keyes,  p.  168. 

9.  O.  R.,  vol.  107,  p.  311. 

10.  0.  R.,  vol.  107,  p.  317. 

11.  J.  W.  Jones,  Life  and  Letters  of  General  Robert  E.  Lee, 
p.  121. 

12.  Page  261.  My  attention  was  kindly  called  to  this  letter 
by  General  Alfred  A.  Woodhull. 

13.  T.  B.  Van  Home,  Life  of  Major-General  George  H. 
Thomas,  p.  25. 

14.  Young,  vol.  n,  p.  295. 

15.  Henry  Coppee,  General  Thomas,  p.  36. 

16.  O.  R.,  vol.  107,  p.  351. 

17.  0.  R.,  vol.  59,  p.  288. 

18.  Henry  Coppee,  General  Thomas,  p.  4. 

19.  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  x,  p.  201. 

20.  N.  M.  Cist,  The  Army  of  the  Cumberland,  p.  236. 

21.  T.  B.  Van  Home,  Life  of  Major-General  George  H. 
Thomas,  p.  425. 


306  NOTES 

22.  T.  B.  Van  Home,  Life  of  Major-General  George  H. 
Thomas,  p.  344. 

23.  O.  R.,  vol.  59,  p.  292. 

24.  O.  R.,  vol.  76,  p.  196. 

25.  O.  JR.,  vol.  50,  p.  21. 

26.  O.  R.,  vol.  55,  p.  96. 

27.  J.  H.  Wilson,  Life  of  Charles  A.  Dana,  p.  281. 

28.  Horace  Porter,  p.  4. 

29.  Horace  Porter,  p.  352. 

30.  Shanks,  p.  64. 

81.  0.  R.t  vol.  54,  p.  69. 

32.  Colonel  Stone,  in  M.  H.  S.  of  M.t  vol.  x,  p.  199. 

33.  T.  B.   Van  Home,  Life  of  Major-General  George  H. 
Thomas,  p.  346. 

34.  Colonel  Stone,  in  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  VII,  p.  503. 

35.  Shanks,  p.  62. 

36.  Colonel  Stone,  in  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  x,  p.  195. 

37.  Charles  A.  Dana,  Recollections  of  the  Civil  War,  p.  125. 

38.  Colonel  Stone,  in  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  x,  p.  200. 

39.  In  Papers  of  the  New  York  Commandery  of  the  Loyal 
Legion,  first  series,  p.  301. 

40.  Sherman,  Memoirs,  vol.  II,  p.  106. 

41.  Shanks,  p.  63. 

42.  Ibid. 

43.  O.  R.,  vol.  76,  p.  7. 

44.  O.  R.,  vol.  4,  p.  303. 

45.  O.  R.,  vol.  23,  p.  657. 

46.  T.  B.  Van  Home,  Life  of  Major-General  George  H. 
Thomas,  p.  434. 

47.  Young,  vol.  II,  p.  296. 

48.  O.  JR.,  vol.  75,  p.  507. 

49.  Henry  Coppee,  General  Thomas,  p.  8. 

50.  O.  R.,  vol.  23,  p.  657. 

51.  Henry  Coppee,  General  Thomas,  p.  323. 

52.  Shanks,  p.  65. 

53.  Colonel  Stone,  in  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  x,  p.  196. 

54.  Colonel  Stone,  in  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  x,  p.  201. 


NOTES  307 

55.  Rusling,  p.  87. 

56.  Shanks,  p.  67. 

57.  Sherman,  Memoirs,  vol.  II,  p.  109. 

58.  Keyes,  p.  169. 

59.  O.  R.,  vol.  94,  p.  561. 

60.  H.  V.  Boynton,  Was  General  Thomas  Slow  at  Nash- 
ville ?  p.  46. 

61.  Henry  Coppee,  General  Thomas,  p.  284. 

62.  T.  B.  Van  Home,  Life  of  Major-General  George  H. 
Thomas,  p.  440. 

63.  O.  R.,  vol.  75,  p.  507. 

64.  Colonel  Stone,  in  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  x,  p.  196. 

65.  O.  R.t  vol.  94,  p.  195. 

66.  H.  B.  Stanton,  p.  72. 

CHAPTER  V:  WILLIAM  TECUMSEH  SHERMAN 

1.  Home  Letters,  p.  42. 

2.  O.  R.,  vol.  100,  p.  547. 

3.  Colonel  Stone,  in  M.  H.  S.  of  M.,  vol.  vill,  p.  343. 

4.  Horace  Porter,  p.  290. 

5.  Shanks,  p.  25. 

6.  W.  L.  Fleming,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  College  Presi- 
dent, p.  307. 

7.  Home  Letters,  p.  24. 

8.  W.  L.  Fleming,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  College  Presi- 
dent, p.  367. 

9.  O.  R.,  vol.  91,  p.  553. 

10.  O.  R.,  vol.  25,  p.  116. 

11.  M.  H.  S.  ofM.,  vol.  vm,  p.  343. 

12.  Josiah  Royce,  California,  p.  444. 

13.  Young,  vol.  II,  p.  291. 

14.  O.  R.,  vol.  56,  p.  459. 

15.  O.  R.,  vol.  58,  p.  281. 

16.  O.  R.,  vol.  25,  p.  875. 

17.  Letters,  p.  184. 

18.  W.  L.  Fleming,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  College  Presi- 
dent, p.  88. 


308  NOTES 

19.  0.  R.,  vol.  100,  p.  478. 

20.  0.  R.,  vol.  109,  p.  561. 

21.  Henry  Villard,  Memoirs,  vol.  I,  p.  210. 

22.  O.  R.,  vol.  8,  p.  446. 

23.  O.  #.,  vol.  76,  p.  794. 

24.  O.  R.,  vol.  59,  p.  222. 

25.  H.  B.  Stanton,  p.  25. 

26.  O.  R.,  vol.  100,  p.  478. 

27.  O.  R.,  vol.  76,  p.  306. 

28.  David  French  Boyd,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  a  College 
President,  p.  4. 

29.  Home  Letters,  p.  247. 

30.  David  French  Boyd,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  a  College 
President,  p.  4. 

31.  Walter  L.  Fleming,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  College 
President,  p.  59. 

32.  O.  R.,  vol.  53,  p.  381. 

33.  Home  Letters,  p.  272. 

34.  O.  R.,  vol.  38,  p.  278. 

35.  O.  R.,  vol.  54,  p.  765. 

36.  O.  R.9  vol.  56,  p.  98. 

37.  Ibid. 

38.  To  Mrs.  Sherman,  in  W.  L.  Fleming,  General  W.  T. 
Sherman  as  College  President,  p.  352. 

39.  O.  R.,  vol.  38,  p.  472. 

40.  Rusling,  p.  111. 

41.  O.  R.,  vol.  76,  p.  137. 

42.  John  M.  Schofield,  Forty-Six  Years  in  the  Army,  p.  356. 

43.  Young,  vol.  II,  p.  293. 

44.  O.  R.,  vol.  4,  p.  298. 

45.  O.  0.  Howard,  Autobiography,  vol.  I,  p.  475. 

46.  Shanks,  p.  25. 

47.  Memoirs,  vol.  II,  p.  407. 

48.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  iv,  p.  250. 

49.  B.  &  L.,  vol.  m,  p.  467. 

50.  O.  R.,  vol.  53,  p.  358. 

51.  0.  R.,  vol.  52,  p.  295. 


NOTES  309 

52.  O.  R.,  vol.  38,  p.  209. 

53.  O.  R.,  vol.  25,  p.  572. 

54.  O.  R.,  vol.  38,  p.  574. 

55.  O.  R.,  vol.  99,  p.  856. 

56.  O.  R.,  vol.  52,  p.  403. 

57.  Memoirs,  vol.  II,  p.  393. 

58.  O.  R.,  vol.  72,  p.  67. 

59.  D.  F.  Boyd,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  a  College  Presi- 
dent, p.  6. 

60.  Shanks,  p.  26. 

61.  Ibid. 

62.  Henry  Villard,  Memoirs,  vol.  I,  p.  211. 

63.  W.  L.  Fleming,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  College  Presi- 
dent, p.  381. 

64.  W.  L.  Fleming,  article  on  "Sherman  as  College  Presi- 
dent," reprinted  from  South  Atlantic  Quarterly,  p.  17. 

65.  W.  L.  Fleming,  General  W.  T.  Sherman  as  College  Presi- 
dent, p.  211. 

66.  0.  R.,  vol.  52,  p.  336. 

67.  0.  R.,  vol.  38,  p.  10. 

68.  Home  Letters,  p.  335. 

69.  Home  Letters,  p.  323. 

CHAPTER  VI:  EDWIN  McMASTERS  STANTON 

1.  John  T.  Morse,  Jr.,  Abraham  Lincoln,  vol.  I,  p.  328. 

2.  Welles,  vol.  I,  p.  129. 

3.  Donn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who  Saved  the  Union, 
p.  79. 

4.  Grant,  vol.  II,  p.  105. 

5.  Welles,  vol.  I,  p.  67. 

6.  Bigelow,  vol.  iv,  p.  272. 

7.  James   G.   Elaine,   Twenty  Years  of  Congress,  vol.  I, 
p.  563. 

8.  Rhodes,  U.S.,  vol.  v,  p.  180. 

9.  Donn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who  Saved  the  Union, 
p.  79. 


310  NOTES 

10.  Donn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who  Saved  the  Union, 
p.  67. 

11.  Welles,  vol.  I,  p.  127. 

12.  O.  S.,  p.  137. 

13.  Ibid. 

14.  Sherman,  Letters,  p.  250. 

15.  John  T.  Morse,  Jr.,  Abraham  Lincoln,  vol.  II,  p.  241. 

16.  James  G.  Blaine,   Twenty  Years  of  Congress,    vol.  I, 
p.  563. 

17.  Abner  Doubleday,  Chancellorsville  and  Gettysburg,  p.  144. 

18.  Grant,  vol.  II,  p.  537. 

19.  Rhodes,  U.S.,  vol.  v,  p.  175. 

20.  Welles,  vol.  I,  p.  65. 

21.  Grant,  vol.  II,  p.  536. 

22.  J.  H.  Wilson,  Life  of  Charles  A.  Dana,  p.  305. 

23.  L.  E.  Chittenden,  Recollections  of  President  Lincoln  and 
his  Administration,  p.  185. 

24.  L.  E.  Chittenden,  Recollections  of  President  Lincoln  and 
his  Administration,  p.  182. 

25.  Flower,  p.  143. 

26.  O.  R.,  vol.  48,  p.  172. 

27.  F.  B.  Carpenter,  Six  Months  in  the  White  House  with 
Abraham  Lincoln,  p.  55. 

28.  There  are  many  different  versions  of  this.  See  Lincoln, 
Master  of  Men,  by  Alonzo  Rothschild,  p.  224  and  note. 

29.  James  Buchanan,  Works,  vol.  xi,  p.  213. 

30.  Morgan  Dix,  Memoir  of  John  Adams  Dix,  vol.  II,  p.  19. 

31.  O.  S.,  p.  152. 

32.  F.  B.  Carpenter,  Six  Months  in  the  White  House  with 
Abraham  Lincoln,  p.  265. 

33.  N.  &  H.,  vol.  v,  p.  146. 

34.  Flower,  p.  311. 

35.  Alonzo  Rothschild,  Lincoln,  Master  of  Men,  p.  288. 

36.  George  W.  Julian,  Political  Recollections,  p.  212. 

37.  Flower,  p.  311. 

38.  L.  E.  Chittenden,  Recollections  of  President  Lincoln  and 
his  Administration,  p.  184. 


NOTES  311 

39.  Albert  Gallatin  Riddle,  Recollections  of  War  Times,  p.  316. 

40.  O.  R.,  vol.  14,  p.  103. 

41.  Charles  E.  Hamlin,  Life  and  Times  of  Hannibal  Hamlin, 
p.  432. 

42.  Donn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who  Saved  the  Union, 
p.  62. 

43.  Moorfield  Storey,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  345. 

44.  Eulogies  Delivered  on  the  Occasion  of  the  Announcement  of 
the  Death  of  Hon.  Edwin  M.  Stanton,  p.  47. 

45.  Eulogies,  as  above,  p.  28. 

46.  Flower,  p.  37. 

47.  Mrs.  Roger  A.  Pryor,  My  Day,  p.  248. 

48.  Eulogies,  as  above,  p»  8. 

49.  Eulogies,  as  above,  p.  7. 

50.  Harriet  Beecher  Stowe,  The  Lives  and  Deeds  of  Our  Self- 
Made  Men,  p.  376. 

51.  W.  H.  Whiton,  in  Flower,  p.  419. 

52.  Flower,  p.  360. 

53.  Flower,  p.  98. 

54.  To  Hooker,  O.  R.,  vol.  43,  p.  48. 

55.  Flower,  p.  207. 

56.  Flower,  p.  34. 

57.  Ibid. 

58.  Donn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who  Saved  the  Union, 
p.  52. 

59.  Flower,  p.  417. 

60.  Charles  A.  Dana,  Recollections  of  the  Civil  War,  p.  7. 

61.  Albert   Gallatin  Riddle,   Recollections  of  War  Times, 
p.  321. 

62.  To  Dyer,  May  18,  1862,  in  W.  D.  Kelley,  Speech  on 
Stanton,  June  8,  1886. 

CHAPTER  VII:  WILLIAM  HENRY  SEWARD 

1.  To  Sherman,  O.  R.,  vol.  76,  p.  857. 

2.  F.  B.  Carpenter,  Six  Months  in  the  White  House  with 
Abraham  Lincoln,  p.  242. 


312  NOTES 

3.  Life,  vol.  I,  p.  522. 

4.  Bigelow,  vol.  v,  p.  83. 

5.  Carl  Schurz,  Reminiscences,  vol.  II,  p.  34. 

6.  Donn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who  Saved  the  Union, 
p.  137. 

7.  H.  B.  Stanton,  p.  204. 

8.  N.  &  H.,  vol.  VI,  p.  262. 

9.  Recollections  of  the  Civil  War,  p.  169. 

10.  Works,  vol.  iv,  p.  692. 

11.  Pierce,  vol.  iv,  p.  121. 

12.  H.  B.  Stanton,  p.  223,  does  not  profess  to  be  wholly 
literal. 

13.  Welles,  vol.  ill,  p.  100. 

14.  Welles,  vol.  II,  p.  593. 

15.  Life,  vol.  I,  p.  221. 

16.  Life,  vol.  I,  p.  162. 

17.  Life,  vol.  II,  p.  521. 

18.  Diary,  vol.  II,  p.  45. 

19.  Moorfield  Storey,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  213. 

20.  H.  B.  Stanton,  p.  217. 

21.  Benjamin  Perley  Poore,  Perky's  Reminiscences  of  Sixty 
Years  in  the  National  Metropolis,  vol.  II,  p.  54. 

22.  Sumner  to  Bright,  Pierce,  vol.  iv,  p.  299. 

23.  N.  &  H.,  vol.  x,  p.  105. 

24.  Donn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who  Saved  the  Union, 
p.  136. 

25.  Varina  Howell  Davis,  Jefferson  Davis,  vol.  I,  p.  58L 

26.  Varina  Howell  Davis,  Jefferson  Davis,  vol.  I,  p.  583. 

27.  Edwin  Lawrence  Godkin,  Life  and  Letters,  vol.  I,  p.  258. 

28.  Life,  vol.  I,  p.  22. 

29.  Works,  vol.  IV,  p.  416. 

30.  Life,  vol.  n,  p.  46. 

31.  Thurlow  Weed,  Memoirs,  vol.  I,  p.  640. 

32.  Edwin  Lawrence  Godkin,  Life  and  Letters,  vol.  I,  p.  264. 

33.  Carl  Schurz,  Reminiscences,  vol.  II,  p.  282. 

34.  Life,  vol.  n,  p.  535. 

35.  Welles,  vol.  I,  p.  284. 


NOTES  313 

36.  Welles,  vol.  I,  p.  24. 

37.  W.  H.  Russell,  My  Diary  North  and  South,  March  26, 

1861. 

38.  Lord  Newton,  Life  of  Lord  Lyons,  vol.  I,  p.  33. 

39.  Bigelow,  vol.  ill,  p.  628. 

40.  To  Bigelow,  May  21,  1864,  in  Bigelow,  vol.  II,  p.  188. 

41.  Moorfield  Storey,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  345. 

42.  Bigelow,  vol.  I,  p.  505. 

43.  Life,  vol.  ill,  p.  120. 

44.  Thurlow  Weed,  Memoirs,  vol.  II,  p.  99. 

45.  Works,  vol.  n,  p.  215. 

46.  Charles  Francis  Adams,  An  Address  on  the  Life,  Charac- 
ter, and  Public  Services  of  William  Henry  Seward,  p.  57. 

47.  Rhodes,  U.S.,  vol.  II,  p.  305. 

48.  Frederic  Bancroft,  Life  of  William  H.  Seward,  vol.  n, 
p.  86. 

49.  Life,  vol.  n,  p.  136. 

50.  Life,  vol.  in,  p.  483. 

51.  Works,  vol.  v,  p.  489. 

52.  Life,  vol.  I,  p.  614. 

53.  Life,  vol.  I,  p.  724. 

54.  Bigelow,  vol.  IV,  p.  271. 

55.  Bigelow,  vol.  in,  p.  640. 

56.  Life,  vol.  ill,  p.  493. 

57.  Thurlow  Weed,  Memoirs,  vol.  II,  p.  408. 

58.  Life,  vol.  ill,  p.  205. 

59.  Donn  Piatt,  Memories  of  the  Men  Who  Saved  the  Union, 
p.  63. 

60.  Bigelow,  vol.  ill,  p.  630. 

61.  To  Lord  John  Russell,  August,  1863,  in  Lord  Newton's 
Life  of  Lord  Lyons,  vol.  i,  p.  117. 

62.  N.  &  H.,  vol.  m,  p.  320. 

63.  To  Bigelow,  in  conversation,  Bigelow,  vol.  iv,  p.  43. 

64.  Frederic  Bancroft,  Life  of  William  H.  Seward,  vol.  II, 
p.  418. 

65.  Works,  vol.  iv,  p.  553. 

66.  Works,  vol.  II,  p.  208. 


314  NOTES 


CHAPTER  VIII:  CHARLES  SUMNER 

1.  Works,  vol.  xn,  p.  521. 

2.  To  Longfellow,  March  4, 1859,  Longfellow,  vol.  n,  p.  380. 

3.  Scribner's  Monthly,  vol.  x,  p.  299. 

4.  M.  A.  DeWolfe  Howe,  Letters  of  Charles  Eliot  Norton, 
vol.  I,  p.  422. 

5.  Quoted  in  George  H.  Haynes,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  388. 

6.  Edwin  Lawrence  Godkin,  Life  and  Letters,  vol.  I,  p.  296. 

7.  Moorfield  Storey,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  8. 

8.  Quoted  in  George  H.  Haynes,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  384. 

9.  To  Green,  Longfellow,  vol.  I,  p.  304. 

10.  Pierce,  vol.  I,  p.  106. 

11.  Pierce,  vol.  n,  p.  95. 

12.  Pierce,  vol.  II,  p.  132. 

13.  Pierce,  vol.  in,  p.  582. 

14.  Elias  Nason,  The  Life  and  Times  of  Charles  Sumner,  p.  24. 

15.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  Reminiscences,  p.  172. 

16.  Pierce,  vol.  I,  p.  106. 

17.  Pierce,  vol.  II,  p.  252. 

18.  M.  A.  DeWolfe  Howe,  Letters  of  Charles  Eliot  Norton, 
vol.  II,  p.  43,  and  elsewhere. 

19.  Pierce,  vol.  iv,  p.  156. 

20.  Pierce,  vol.  I,  p.  118. 

21.  William  S.  Robinson,  "Warrington,"  Pen-Portraits,  p. 
519. 

22.  Rhodes,  U.S.,  vol.  vi,  p.  24. 

23.  Welles,  vol.  I,  p.  502. 

24.  Pierce,  vol.  I,  p.  180. 

25.  Longfellow,  vol.  in,  p.  78. 

26.  George  F.  Hoar,  Autobiography  of  Seventy  Years,  vol.  I, 
p.  212. 

27.  Bigelow,  vol.  v,  p.  81. 

28.  Moorfield  Storey,  Charks  Sumner,  p.  431. 

29.  Works,  vol.  xni,  p.  12. 

30.  Works,  vol.  xv,  p.  296. 


NOTES  315 

31.  Julia  Lorillard  Butterfield,  Biographical  Memoir  of  Gen- 
eral Daniel  Butter field ,  p.  158. 

32.  Alonzo  Rothschild,  Lincoln,  Master  of  Men,  p.  32. 

33.  William  M.  Cornell,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  64. 

34.  Elias  Nason,  Life  and  Times  of  Charles  Sumner,  p.  241. 

35.  Thomas  Wentworth  Higginson,  Contemporaries,  p.  291. 

36.  James  Russell  Lowell,  Letters,  vol.  II,  p.  306. 

37.  Noah  Brooks,  Washington  in  Lincoln's  Time,  p.  24. 

38.  M.  A.  DeWolfe  Howe,  Letters  of  Charles  Eliot  Norton, 
vol.  n,  p.  37. 

39.  Longfellow,  vol.  I,  p.  304. 

40.  Pierce,  vol.  I,  p.  307. 

41.  Julia  Ward  Howe,  Reminiscences,  p.  96. 

42.  Pierce,  vol.  I,  p.  306. 

43.  Pierce,  vol.  II,  p.  31. 

44.  William  Claflin,  Life  of  Charles  Sumner,  p.  473. 

45.  A.  B.  Johnson,  in  Scribner's  Monthly,  vol.  vm,  p.  479. 

46.  Pierce,  vol.  in,  p.  322. 

47.  Works,  vol.  vi,  p.  71. 

48.  Henry  Cabot  Lodge,  Early  Memories,  p.  280. 

49.  Pierce,  vol.  in,  p.  259. 

50.  Pierce,  vol.  II,  p.  273. 

51.  Longfellow,  vol.  in,  p.  274. 

52.  Charles  Francis  Adams,  Richard  Henry  Dana,  vol.  I, 
p.  214. 

53.  Pierce,  vol.  m,  p.  220. 

54.  Thomas  Seargeant  Perry,  Life  and  Letters  of  Francis 
Lieber,  p.  298. 

55.  Pierce,  vol.  iv,  p.  304. 

56.  Anna  Laurens  Dawes,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  263. 

57.  Bigelow,  vol.  iv,  p.  134. 

58.  George  H.  Haynes,  Charles  Sumner,  p.  429. 

59.  Carl  Schurz,  Reminiscences,  vol.  II,  p.  312. 

60.  George  F.  Hoar,  in  Forum,  vol.  xvi,  p.  557. 

61.  George  F.  Hoar,  Autobiography  of  Seventy  Years,  vol.  I, 
p.  212. 


316  NOTES 


CHAPTER  IX:  SAMUEL  BOWLES 

1.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  449. 

2.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  442. 

3.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  211. 

4.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  97. 

5.  Nation,  vol.  XLI,  p.  553. 

6.  Charles  A.  Dana,  The  Art  of  Newspaper  Making,  p.  12. 

7.  Works,  vol.  vin,  p.  330. 

8.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  414. 

9.  Augustus  Maverick,  Henry  J.  Raymond  and  tne  New 
York  Press,  p.  221. 

10.  Springfield  Republican,  May  7,  1864. 

11.  Nation,  vol.  XLI,  p.  553. 

12.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  198. 

13.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  318. 

14.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  169. 

15.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  296. 

16.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  171. 

17.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  297. 

18.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  169. 

19.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  394. 

20.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  407. 

21.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  171. 

22.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  321. 

23.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  397. 

24.  Springfield  Republican,  November  9,  1865. 

25.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  340. 

26.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  207. 

27.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  211. 

28.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  432. 

29.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  369. 

30.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  209. 

31.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  74. 

32.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  146. 

33.  Merriam,  vol.  n,  p.  409. 


NOTES  317 

34.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  446. 

35.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  213. 

36.  Letter  of  Senator  Dawes,  in  Springfield  Republican,  Jan- 
uary 24,  1878. 

37.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  293. 

38.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  409. 

39.  Nation,  vol.  XLI,  p.  553. 

40.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  47. 

41.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  348. 

42.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  156. 

43.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  212. 

44.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  299. 

45.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  176. 

46.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  78. 

47.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  79. 


48.  Merriam,  vol. 

49.  Merriam,  vol. 

50.  Merriam,  vol. 

51.  Merriam,  vol. 

52.  Merriam,  vol. 

53.  Merriam,  vol. 

54.  Merriam,  vol. 


,  p.  317. 

p.  323. 

p.  336. 
,  p.  67. 
,  p.  398. 
,  p.  369. 
,  p.  309. 


55.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  63. 

56.  Merriam,  vol.  n,  p.  159. 

57.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  48. 

58.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  403. 

59.  Nation,  vol.  XLI,  p.  553. 

60.  Ibid. 

61.  Ibid. 

62.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  97. 

63.  Merriam,  vol.  I,  p.  318. 

64.  Merriam,  vol.  n,  p.  435. 

65.  Merriam,  vol.  n,  p.  405. 

66.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  405. 

67.  Merriam,  vol.  II,  p.  447. 


INDEX 


INDEX 


Adams,  Charles  Francis,  on 

Seward,  219. 

Alaska,  the  purchase  of,  215. 
Andrew,  John  A.,  Bowles's 

opinion  of,  270. 
Arnold,  Matthew,  letters  of, 

271,  272. 

Bancroft,  George,  on  Seward, 
220,  224,  227,  228. 

Beauregard,  Gen.  P.  G.  T., 
45;  like  McClellan  in  many 
ways,  31. 

Benjamin,  Judah  P.,  anec- 
dote of,  202,  223. 

Berry,  Gen.  Hiram  G.,  relied 
on  by  Hooker,  38. 

Bigelow,  John,  on  Seward, 
214,  226;  warns  Seward  of 
danger  of  assassination, 
216;  on  Sumner,  242. 

Blaine,  James  G.,  on  Stanton, 
169,  172. 

Bowles,  Samuel,  chronology, 
264;  a  great  journalist,  265; 
had  little  education,  265, 
282;  the  Springfield  Repub- 
lican, 266,  267,  269,  270, 
271,  275,  285,  291,  293; 
gibes  at  Boston,  266;  his 
paper  his  life,  266, 277, 285; 
criticized  by  W.  P.  Garri- 
son, 267, 270, 282, 291, 292; 
on  the  power  of  the  press, 
269;  scorned  consistency, 
270;  his  delusions  as  to 
men,  270;  his  letters,  271, 
272;  a  man  of  deep  affec- 


tion, 272;  as  a  family  man, 
272-274;  had  wide  sympa- 
thies, 275;  stopped  prize- 
fighting in  Springfield,  275, 
276;  his  kindness,  276;  emi- 
nently social,  276;  very  hu- 
man, 277,  278;  Senator 
Dawes's  tribute  to,  278; 
relations  with  women,  278- 
280;  his  intellectual  quali- 
ties, 280;  last  words  to 
Dawes,  281;  his  spiritual 
problems,  281,  282;  read 
little  but  newspapers,  282, 
283;  aware  of  his  defi- 
ciencies, 282 ;  a  hard  worker, 
283,  287;  a  severe  taskmas- 
ter, 284;  a  bundle  of  nerves, 
285-287,  289;  never  slept 
enough,  288;  self-analysis 
of,  290;  his  sense  of  failure, 
290,  291;  his  connection 
with  the  Boston  Traveller, 
291;  his  independence,  291, 
292;  criticizes  the  Nation, 
292;  a  fault-finder,  292, 
293;  relations  with  Butler, 
293;  greatly  loved,  293, 294. 

Boyd,  Prof.  David  F.,  on 
Sherman  as  a  reasoner,  143. 

Brackett,  Anna  C.,  on  Bowles, 
280. 

Bradbury,  Senator  James  W., 
240. 

Brooks,  Noah,  quotes  Sum- 
ner,  245. 

Brooks,  Preston,  234,  251, 
255,  257. 


INDEX 


Brown-S6quard,  Dr.,  applies 
moxa  treatment  to  Sumner, 
260. 

Buell,  Gen.  Don  Carlos,  re- 
placed by  Thomas,  112; 
letter  of  Sherman  to,  153. 

Burnside,  Gen.  Ambrose  E., 
letter  of  McClellan  to,  14, 
15;  McClellan's  attitude 
toward,  19;  criticized  by 
Hooker,  39,  40,  44,  45,  61; 
controversy  with  Meade, 
88. 

Butler,  Benjamin  F.,  and 
Bowles,  293. 

Butterfield,  Gen.  Daniel,  54, 
244;  loyal  to  Hooker,  59; 
letter  to  Hooker,  61,  62;  on 
Meade's  nerve,  82. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  on  Sumner, 
235,  248. 

Chancellorsville,  Hooker  at, 
40,  42;  Jackson  at,  45; 
battle  of,  47-51. 

Chase,  Salmon  P.,  commends 
Hooker,  45;  Hooker's  letter 
to,  59,  61. 

Chittenden,  L.  E.,  179. 

Christian  Commission,  criti- 
cized by  Thomas,  119;  and 
by  Sherman,  148. 

Couch,  Gen.  Darius  N.,  54; 
criticizes  Hooker,  49;  re- 
fuses to  take  responsibility, 
50,  51. 

Cox,  Gen.  Jacob  D.,  25;  on 
Thomas,  121, 122;  on  Sher- 
man, 152. 

Curtis,  George  Ticknor,  on 
McClellan's  failure  to  reach 
Richmond,  20. 

Dana,  Charles  A.,  265,  267; 
on  Rosecrans  and  Hooker, 
66,  57;  on  Rosecrans  and 


Thomas,  115;  on  Stanton, 

175. 
Davis,  Mrs.  Jefferson,    205, 

206,  207. 
Dawes,  Senator  Henry  L.,  on 

Bowles,  278,  293;  Bowles's 

last  words  to,  281. 
De       Trobriand,       Philippe 

Regis,  on  Hooker,  46. 
Disraeli,   Benjamin,   quoted, 

101. 
Donaldson,      Quartermaster, 

on  Thomas's  sensitiveness, 

126. 
D  wight,    Col.    Walton,    and 

Stanton,  172. 

Felton,    Cornelius    C.,    and 

Sumner,  253,  254. 
Fremantle,  A.  J.  L.,  40. 

Garfield,  James  A.,  comments 
on  Thomas's  eyes,  117. 

Garrison,  W.  P.,  265;  on 
Bowles,  267,  270,  282,  291, 
292. 

Generalizations,  dangerous, 
40. 

Godkin,  Edwin  L.,  on  Sew- 
ard,  207;  conversation 
with  Seward,  in  regard  to 
slavery,  210;  on  Sumner, 
235,  265;  remarks  on  jour- 
nalism, 268. 

Grant,  Gen.  Ulysses  S.,  51; 
best  defender  of  McClellan, 
21,  22;  did  not  like  Hooker, 
57,  58;  characterizes  the 
battle  of  Lookout  Mountain 
as  poetry,  58;  relations 
with  Meade,  70-72,  89; 
quoted  in  regard  to  Meade, 
87;  comments  on  Thomas, 
107;  and  Thomas  at  Chat- 
tanooga, 113;  on  Sherman's 
accuracy,  138,  157;  on 


INDEX 


323 


Stanton,  169,  173,  175; 
gibes  at  Sumner,  239. 

Greeley,  Horace,  265. 

Gurowski,  Adam,  unfavor- 
able opinion  of  McClellan, 
23;  on  Seward,  205,  206. 

Halleck,  Gen.  Henry  W.,  and 
McClellan,  18;  his  preju- 
dice against  Hooker,  42,  54. 

Hancock,  Gen.  Winfield 
Scott,  personal  appearance 
of,  35. 

Heintzelman,  Gen.  Samuel 
P.,  on  McClellan,  10. 

Henderson,  George  F.  R.,  on 
McClellan,  22. 

Hillard,  George  S.,  defends 
McClellan,  20,  21. 

Hoar,  Senator  George  F.,  on 
Sumner,  242,  259,  260. 

Holland,  Lady,  235. 

Hooker,  Gen.  Joseph,  charac- 
terizes the 'retreat  from  the 
Peninsula,  13,  23;  chronol- 
ogy, 34;  personal  appear- 
ance, 35;  birthplace,  35;  at 
West  Point,  36;  in  the 
Mexican  War,  36;  "Fight- 
ing Joe,"  36,  39,  59;  his 
humor,  37;  interest  in  his 
men,  37,  38,  39;  beloved  by 
his  troops,  38;  wounded  at 
Antietam,  38,  39;  in  con- 
flict with  Burnside,  39,  40; 
his  use  of  alcohol,  41;  at 
Chancellorsville,  41,  48;  in 
California,  41,  42;  origin  of 
Halleck's  and  Sherman's 
prejudice  against,  42;  on 
Pillow's  staff,  43;  his  lively 
tongue,  43, 44, 45, 47, 54, 59, 
61 ;  interview  with  Lincoln, 
44;  thought  poorly  of  Mc- 
Clellan and  Burnside,  44, 
45;  comments  on  Lincoln's 


letter  to  him,  46;  prepares 
to  meet  Lee,  47,  48;  a  con- 
tradiction in  his  character, 
48;  unequal  to  his  opportu- 
nity, 49,  50;  severely  in- 
jured, 50;  calls  a  council  of 
commanders,  51;  is  badly 
beaten,  52;  his  view  of  his 
failure,  52,  53;  neglects  to 
make  official  report,  53; 
record  as  commander  of  the 
Army  of  the  Potomac,  53, 
54;  criticizes  other  officers, 
.  54;  protests  to  the  Presi- 
dent, 55;  asks  to  be  relieved 
of  command,  55,  63;  his 
later  career,  56,  63;  his  ten- 
dency to  faultfinding,  56, 57; 
snubbed  by  Grant,  57;  at 
Lookout  Mountain,  58;  al- 
ways at  his  best  when  fight- 
ing, 59;  his  sensitiveness, 
59;  his  relations  with 
Thomas,  Slocum,  Schurz, 
and  Sherman,  59,  60;  Col. 
Stone's  tribute  to,  61;  But- 
terfield's  warning,  61,  62; 
snubbed  by  Stanton,  63; 
asks  to  be  relieved,  63 ;  thor- 
oughly human,  63,  64;  his 
admission  to  Doubleday, 
64 ;  Lincoln's  estimate  of,  64. 

Hough,  Col.  Alfred  L.,  on 
Thomas's  sense  of  his  duty, 
107. 

Howard,  Gen.  Oliver  0.,  57f 
60;  and  his  Eleventh  Corps 
meet  with  disaster,  49,  53; 
his  feeling  toward  Thomas, 
117,  118;  on  Sherman,  152. 

Hunt,  Gen.  Henry  J.,  defends 
Meade's  course  at  Gettys- 
burg, 76. 

Jackson,  Gen.  Thomas  J., 
meets  Hooker  in  battle,  49; 


324 


INDEX 


is  wounded,  60;  compared 

with  Stanton,  194. 
Johnson,  A.  B.,  234. 
Johnson,  Andrew,  195,  206. 
Journalism,    importance    of, 

268,  269,  294. 

Kearny,  Gen.  Philip,  critic  of 
McClellan,  23. 

Keyes,  E.  M.,  quoted  in  re- 
gard to  Thomas,  104,  126. 

Lee,  Fitzhugh,  and  Thomas, 
104. 

Lee,  Gen.  Robert  E.,  remark 
of,  10,  11;  generous  de- 
fender of  McClellan,  21; 
meets  Hooker  aggressively, 
49;  on  secession,  100,  106. 

Lieber,  Francis,  his  friendship 
with  Sumner,  253,  254. 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  and  Mc- 
Clellan, 6,  9,  16,  17;  sug- 
gests charge  of  treason  to 
McClellan,  26,  27;  rela- 
tions with  Hooker,  44,  46; 
prays  in  despair,  52;  begins 
to  distrust  Hooker,  55;  but 
praises  his  magnanimity, 
64;  urges  Meade  to  attack 
Lee,  75,  76;  his  relations 
with  Stanton,  176-181; 
quotes  Petroleum  V. 
Nasby,  183;  estimate  of 
Seward's  eloquence,  200; 
relations  with  Seward,  211, 
212;  and  with  Sumner,  244; 
Bowles's  opinion  of,  270. 

Livermore,  Col.  W.  R.,  on 
Hooker,  51;  on  Meade,  75, 
81 ;  on  Thomas's  career,  122. 

Lodge,  Henry  Cabot,  247. 

Longfellow,  Henry  W.,  on 
Sumner,  236,  242,  253;  his 
love  for  Sumner,  246,  247; 
quoted,  268. 


Lookout  Mountain,  the 
battle  of,  one  of  Hooker's 
claims  to  glory,  58,  60. 

Lowell,  James  Russell,  on 
Sumner,  245. 

Lyons  Lord,  on  Seward,  213, 
214,  226. 

Lytton,  Lord,  his  LiicUe 
criticized  by  Meade,  73. 

Macaulay,  T.  B.,  and  Sum- 
ner, 234,  235. 

Magruder,  Gen.  John  B., 
quoted  in  regard  to  Hooker, 
40. 

McClellan,  Gen.  George  Brin- 
ton,  chronology,  2;  early 
career,  3;  his  own  view  of 
himself,  4,  5,  8,  9,  11,  14; 
his  parting  with  Scott,  5; 
letter  of  advice  to  Lincoln, 
6;  never  had  the  discipline 
of  a  subordinate  position, 
7;  self-satisfied,  7,  8;  a 
superior  organizer,  8,  22; 
fertile  in  plans,  8,  9; 
snubbed  by  Scott,  9;  as  a 
leader,  10,  11;  loved  by  his 
soldiers,  11,  31,  32;  his 
habitual  delusion  as  to  ene- 
my's numbers,  12,  26;  his 
opinion  of  Antietam  and 
Malvern  Hill,  12,  13;  his 
sense  of  his  own  impor- 
tance, 14;  letterto  Burnside, 
14, 15;  considers  taking  dic- 
tatorship, 15,  16;  his  dis- 
belief in  the  judgment  of 
others,  16;  his  anger  with 
Halleck  and  Stanton,  18, 
19;  attitude  towards  Mc- 
Dowell, 19;  critics  and  de- 
fenders, 20-24;  effect  of 
criticism  on,  24,  25,  26;  his 
loyalty  questioned,  26;  his 
dislike  of  abolitionism,  26; 


INDEX 


325 


sincerely  patriotic,  27; 
most  unselfish,  28;  a  man  of 
high  ideals  and  purity  of 
character,  28;  candidate 
for  the  Presidency,  28,  29; 
governor  of  New  Jersey, 
29;  his  religious  faith,  29, 
30;  his  power  of  winning 
men,  30,  31,  32;  depreciates 
Hooker,  37;  criticized  by 
Hooker,  44;  on  Stanton's 
duplicity,  170. 

McClellan,  Mrs.  George  B., 
4,  5,  13. 

McClellan's  Own  Story,  4, 
14,  25. 

McClernand,  Gen.  John  A., 
144. 

McClure,  Col.  Alexander  K., 
on  McClellan,  7. 

McDowell,  Gen.  Irvin,  and 
McClellan,  19. 

McPherson,  Gen.  James  B., 
157. 

Meade,  Gen.  George  Gordon, 
51,  54;  characterization  of 
Mrs.  McClellan,  5;  criti- 
cizes McClellan,  23,  24; 
defends  Hooker  from 
charge  of  drinking,  41; 
substituted  for  Hooker,  55; 
chronology,  66;  at  Gettys- 
burg, 67;  one  of  the  second- 
ary figures  of  the  war,  67, 
68;  desired  success,  68,  69; 
his  letters  to  his  wife,  68, 
69,  70,  79,  80,  92;  his  sensi- 
tiveness, 69, 70 ;  trouble  over 
Reynolds's  removal,  69,  70; 
attitude  toward  Grant  and 
Sheridan,  70,  71,  85,  89;  his 
candor,  70,  71,  76,  77;  rela- 
tions with  Grant,  70-72, 
85;  had  instinct  of  sacrifice, 
72,  73;  his  failure  to  pursue 
Lee,  72,  73,  75,  76;  had  in- 


telligence of  high  order,  73, 
74,  76;  his  policy  in  the 
Mexican  War,  74;  his  toler- 
ance and  charity,  74;  Lin- 
coln appeals  to,  75,  76;  ana- 
lyzes his  own  conduct,  77; 
his  modesty,  78,  79;  had 
proper  sense  of  his  own 
value,  79,  80;  not  a  soldier 
by  instinct,  81;  cool  in  ac- 
tion, 82;  found  camp  life  a 
trial,  83;  had  high  sense  of 
honor,  83,  84;  loved  peace, 
•34;  not  popular  with  his 
men,  85;  just  to  fellow  offi- 
cers, 85;  not  tactful,  86,  87, 
88;  his  fits  of  temper,  87, 
88,  89;  portrait  of,  88;  let- 
ter to  Halleck,  90;  sharp 
scene  with  a  newspaper 
man,  91;  charming  in  fam- 
ily relations,  91;  frank  in 
regard  to  himself,  92,  93; 
his  religious  interests,  93, 
94;  his  contempt  for  His- 
tory, 94;  failed  to  attain 
to  great  reputation,  94, 
95. 

Merriam,  George  S.,  biogra- 
pher of  Bowles,  267. 

Moltke,  Count  von,  74;  on 
McClellan,  21. 

Morley,  Lord,  comment  on 
Sumner,  235. 

Morse,  John  T.,  on  Stanton, 
167,  168,  172. 

Morton,  Oliver  P.,  195. 

Motley,  John  Lothrop,  and 
Seward,  224. 

Napoleon,  a  maxim  of,  51* 
Nasby,  Petroleum  V.,  quoted 

by  Lincoln,  183. 
Newcastle,  Duke  of,  213. 
Norton,  Charles  Eliot,  feeling 

toward  Sumner,  246. 


326 


INDEX 


Palfrey,  Gen.  F.  W.,  on 
McClellan,  22;  quoted  in 
regard  to  Hooker,  40,  41. 

Paris,  Comte  de,  a  defender 
of  McClellan,  21. 

Pepys,  Samuel,  quoted,  4,  5. 

Piatt,  Donn,  on  Stanton,  169; 
and  Seward,  206,  225. 

Pillow,  Gen.  Gideon  J.,  36; 
arraigned,  43. 

Porter,  Fitz  John,  on  Thomas, 
108. 

Porter,  Horace,  describes 
Meade  in  battle,  82;  on 
Grant  and  Thomas  at 
Chattanooga,  113;  on 
Thomas's  humor,  126;  first 
meeting  with  Sherman,  134, 
135. 

Pulpit  and  press,  268. 

Raymond,  Henry  J.,  265. 

Reynolds,  Col.  J.  A.,  his 
tribute  to  Hooker,  38. 

Reynolds,  Gen.  John  F.,  38; 
and  Meade,  69,  70,  93. 

Rhodes,  James  Ford,  25;  on 
Stanton,  169, 171, 173, 190; 
puzzled  by  Seward,  220. 

Robinson,  William  S.  ("  War- 
rington"),  on  Sumner,  240. 

Ropes,  John  C.,on  McClellan, 
17, 22. 

Rosecrans,  Gen.  William  S., 
condemned  by  Hooker,  56; 
comments  of  Dana,  56,  57; 
brilliant  but  erratic,  115. 

Rothschild,  Alonzo,  179. 

Royce,  Prof.  Josiah,  com- 
ments on  Sherman's  mem- 
ory, 138. 

Rusling,  Gen.  J.  F.,  praises 
Hooker,  37. 

Russell,  W.  H.,  criticizes  Mc- 
Clellan, 23,  29;  on  Seward, 
213. 


Sanitary  Commission,  criti- 
cized by  Thomas,  119;  and 
by  Sherman,  148. 

Schaff,  Gen.  Morris,  quoted 
in  regard  to  Meade,  86,  87, 
89,  91. 

Schofield,  Gen.  John  McA., 
on  Hooker,  60;  criticizes 
Thomas,  121;  on  Sherman 
in  battle,  152. 

Schurz,  Carl,  and  Hooker,  60; 
Thomas's  opinion  of,  112; 
sharp  note  from  Stanton, 
176;  on  Seward,  201,  210; 
on  Sumner,  252,  259. 

Scott,  Gen.  Winfield,  Mc- 
Clellan's  account  of  his 
parting  with,  5;  snubs 
McClellan,  9. 

Secession,  claims  of,  100. 

Sedgwick,  Gen.  John,  at 
Chancellorsville,  48,  49; 
ordered  to  withdraw,  52; 
harshly  criticized  by 
Hooker,  54;  commended 
by  Grant,  72. 

Seward,  William  Henry,  chro- 
nology, 198;  played  politics 
naturally,  199;  had  the  art 
of  influencing  men,  199, 
200;  anecdotes  of,  200,  202, 
203, 206, 213, 214, 218, 225; 
Lincoln's  estimate  of  his 
eloquence,  200,  201,  229;  a 
political  manager,  201; 
Schurz's  opinion  of,  201; 
and  Thurlow  Weed,  201, 
202;  his  popularity,  202, 
203;  his  temper,  203;  his 
personal  charm,  203,  204; 
his  son's  tribute,  204;  his 
love  of  his  family,  205; 
kindness  to  Jefferson  Davis, 
205;  attempts  to  keep  a 
diary,  205;  Gurowski's 
opinion  of,  205,  206;  com- 


INDEX 


327 


ment  of  Andrew  Johnson 
on,  206;  Godkin  on,  207;  a 
tremendous  worker,  208, 
209;  his  attitude  toward 
slavery,  209,  210;  his  love 
of  the  Union,  210-212; 
"Thoughts  for  the  Presi- 
dent's Consideration,"  211, 
212;  relations  with  Lincoln, 
212;  his  conduct  of  foreign 
relations,  213;  the  Trent  af- 
fair, 214;  Mexican  policy, 
214,  215,  216;  purchase  of 
Alaska,  215;  his  conception 
of  the  future  of  America, 
215, 216;  his  optimism,  216, 

217,  228;  on  assassination, 
216,  217;  sometimes  deeply 
oppressed,  217;  his  finan- 
cial honesty,  218;  often  in 
financial  trouble,  218;  sup- 
ported  unpopular   causes, 

218,  219;  his  attitude  in 
face  of  defeat,  219,  220;  a 
complex    personage,    220- 
224;  essentially  an  artist, 
221-223,    228;    always    a 
humorist,    224,    225;    had 
keen  wit,  225;  his  vanity, 
225-227;    his    imaginative 
outlook,  227. 

Shanks,  W.  F.  G.,  anecdote  of 
Thomas,  125. 

Sheridan,  Gen.  Philip,  feeling 
of  Meade  toward,  70,  85; 
impudent  to  Meade, 
89,  90;  Sherman  expected 
bloody  results  from,  137. 

Sherman,  John,  on  Stanton, 
171. 

Sherman,  Gen.  William  Te- 
cumseh,  42;  chief  figure  in 
Hooker's  tragedy,  60; 
points  of  resemblance  to 
Hooker,  60;  compared  with 
Burnside,  61;  distrustful  of 


Hooker,  62, 63;  on  Thomas, 
118,  127;  chronology,  132; 
typically  American,  133, 
135,  151;  contrasted  with 
Thomas,  Lincoln,  and 
Grant,  133,  134,  162;  his 
health,  134;  characteristics, 
134,  135;  migratory  and  of 
many  interests,  135,  136; 
his  vivid  imagination,  136, 

137,  139;  advice  to  Sheri- 
dan,    137;    his    accuracy 
questioned,  138;  Memoirs, 

138,  162;  a  lively  talker, 
139, 140, 142;  feeling  about 
slavery,  140;  power  of  ex- 
pression, 140,  141;  his  way 
of   receiving   advice,    141, 
144;  a  reasoner,  143;  com- 
pares himself  with  Grant 
and     McClernand,      144; 
fiercely  reasonable,  144, 145 ; 
attitude  toward  the  press, 
145,146, 147;  mistrusts  pop- 
ular government,  146,  147; 
the  march  to  the  sea,  147, 
148,  154;  systematic,  148; 
comments  on  Sanitary  and 
Christian       Commissions, 
148;  skill  in  handling  men, 
149;  loved  by  his  soldiers, 
150;  a  tireless  worker,  151; 
considers  fighting  a  busi- 
ness, 151, 152, 154;  attitude 
toward  posterity,  152,  153; 
free  from  petty  vanity,  153; 
advice  to  Buell,  153;  treat- 
ment of  the  enemy,  154; 
characterization    of    war, 
154, 155;  emotional  nature, 
156,     157;     comment     of 
Grant  on,  157;  popular  be- 
lief that  he  was  insane,  157, 
158;  had  shrewd  wit,  158, 
159;   sensitively  conscien- 
tious,  159,   160;  religious 


328 


INDEX 


beliefs,  160;  official  and 
personal  letters,  161,  162; 
fellow  citizens  offer  house 
to,  162,  163;  Stanton's 
treatment  of,  171. 

Slocum,  Gen.  Henry  W.,  57; 
his  abuse  of  Hooker,  60. 

Smith,  Gen.  A.  J.,  125. 

Springfield  Republican,  266, 
267,269,270,271,275,285, 
291,  293. 

Stanton,  Edwin  McMasters, 
and  McClellan,  18;  Hook- 
er's letter  to,  59,  63;  and 
Thomas,  127;  chronology, 
166;  thoroughly  disliked, 
167;  John  T.  Morse  on, 
167,  168,  172;  Gideon 
Welles  on,  168-173,  191; 
fond  of  power,  169;  jealous, 
169, 170;  did  not  hesitate  at 
methods,  170;  accused  of 
duplicity,  170,  171;  and  of 
truckling,  171,  172;  anec- 
dotes of,  172, 175, 176, 178, 
180, 184, 185, 186, 188, 190, 
193, 195;  his  alleged  lack  of 
courage,  172,  173,  191; 
needlessly  disagreeable, 
174;  his  daily  receptions 
sometimes  shindies,  175; 
sharp  reply  to  Schurz,  176; 
rudeness  toward  Lincoln, 
176,  177;  came  to  admire 
and  love  Lincoln,  178,  179; 
his  resignation  refused,  180; 
enjoyed  saying  no,  181; 
had  depths  of  emotion,  181, 
182 ;  his  face  and  voice,  182 ; 
had  little  humor,  183;  en- 
joyed Dickens,  183;  his 
first  marriage,  184;  eager  to 
relieve  suffering,  185;  rare- 
ly apologized,  186;  an  enor- 
mous worker,  187,  18B;  a 
master  of  system,  188, 189; 


had  keenness  of  insight,  189, 
and  abounding  energy,  189, 
190;  died  poor,  192;  capa- 
ble of  great  personal  sacri- 
fice, 192;  his  view  of  the 
Bible,  193;  his  intellectual 
quality,  193,  194;  com- 
pared with  Stonewall  Jack- 
son, 194;  his  supreme  end, 
195,  196;  friction  with 
Sumner,  244. 

State  rights,  100. 

Sterne,  Laurence,  cited  by 
Seward,  223,  224. 

Stone,  Col.  Henry,  his  tribute 
to  Hooker,  61;  on  Sher- 
man's Memoirs,  138. 

Stoneman,  Gen.  George,  on 
McClellan,  42;  criticized  by 
Thomas,  112. 

Storey,  Moorfield,  on  Sum- 
ner, 236, 242, 243, 246,  247. 

Story,  W.  W.,  on  Sumner, 
237,  238,  247. 

Sumner,  Charles,  called  a 
man  of  one  idea,  233;  an 
omnivorous  reader,  234; 
suggests  Macaulay,  234, 
235;  his  information  singu- 
larly complete,  235;  lacked 
emotional  qualities,  236, 
237,  239,  240;  his  marriage, 
237,  254,  255;  his  attitude 
toward  women,  237,  238; 
indifferent  to  danger,  239; 
without  religious  feeling, 
239;  sympathies  absorbed 
by  the  negro,  240;  his  self- 
confidence,  241-243;  his 
pedantry,  243,  244;  Lin- 
coln's comment  on,  244; 
and  Stanton,  244;  posed 
even  when  alone,  245;  sense 
of  humor  limited,  245,  246; 
had  most  affectionate 
friends,  246,  247;  a  social 


INDEX 


829 


success  at  home  and 
abroad,  247, 248;  a  good  lis- 
tener, 249;  his  curiosity, 
249, 250;  kind  and  amiable, 
250;  attitude  toward  Pres- 
ton Brooks,  251;  an  exas- 
perating political  opponent 
251,  252;  his  friendships, 
252-254;  lacked  definite 
ambition,  255;  publication 
of  his  works,  256;  his  anti- 
slavery  struggle,  257,  258; 
practical  in  his  methods, 
258;  splendidly  honest, 
259;  endured  social  and 
physical  martyrdom,  259, 
260;  believed  that  words 
could  do  anything,  261. 

Sumner,  Mrs.  Charles,  255. 

Sumner,  Gen.  Edwin  V.,  43. 

Swinton,  William,  sums  up 
McClellan,  24. 

Thomas,  Miss  Fannie  C., 
letter  of,  106. 

Thomas,  Gen.  George  Henry, 
friendly  to  Hooker,  59,  60; 
chronology,  98;  a  Virginian, 
but  true  to  the  Union,  99; 
censured  by  Southerners, 
102;  his  wife's  influence, 
103,  104;  letter  to  the  Vir- 
ginia Military  Institute, 
104;  letter  to  Gov.  Letcher, 
105;  divided  in  loyalty  at 
one  time,  106;  Grant's 
comment  on,  107;  influ- 
enced by  attack  on  Fort 
Sumter,  107,  108;  his  opin- 
ion of  deserters,  108;  his 
attitude  toward  slavery, 
108,  109;  always  reserved, 
109;  declines  to  be  candi- 
date for  presidency,  110, 
124,  125;  his  modesty,  111; 
his  estimate  of  Schurz,  112; 


on  the  Stoneman  raid,  112; 
reluctant  to  succeed  Rose- 
crans,  112;  relations  with 
Grant  at  Chattanooga,  112, 
113;  a  man  of  system,  114, 
115,  116;  his  reliability, 
117;  his  physique,  117; 
some  defects,  118;  criti- 
cizes Sanitary  and  Chris- 
tian Commissions,  119;  at- 
titude toward  rank,  119, 
123;  protests  against  subor- 
dination to  Mitchell  and 
•Rosecrans,  119, 120;  charge 
of  slowness,  120,  121;  criti- 
cized by  Schofield,  Grant, 
and  Sherman,  121;  nick- 
name, 121,  128;  as  a  gen- 
eral, 122;  disclaims  ambi- 
tion, 123;  his  temper,  123, 
124;  his  joy  in  fighting,  125; 
sense  of  humor,  125,  126; 
sensitiveness,  126,  127; 
kindness  to  men  and  ani- 
mals, 127,  128;  respected 
by  Southerners,  128;  a 
royal  and  heroic  figure,  129. 

Thomas,  Mrs.,  quoted,  103. 

Traveller,  Boston,  291. 

Twain,  Mark,  159. 

Villard,  Henry,  compares 
Hooker  and  Hancock  as  to 
personal  appearance,  35; 
meets  Hooker,  44,  45;  on 
Sherman's  strange  be- 
havior, 157. 

Virginia,  mother  of  soldiers, 
129. 

Walker,  Gen.  Francis  A.,  on 
McClellan,  31;  on  personal 
appearance  of  Hooker,  35; 
on  Bowles's  kindness,  276. 

Warren,  Gen.  Gouverneur  K., 
48. 


330 


INDEX 


"Warnngton"  (William  S. 
Robinson),  on  Sumner,  240. 

Weed,  Thurlow,  218,  265;  on 
Stanton,  189;  influence  on 
Seward,  201,  202,  220. 

Welles,  Gideon,  on  Stanton, 
168-173,  191;  on  Seward, 
203,  205,  206,  212;  criti- 
cizes Sumner,  240. 

Whiting,  Gen.  W.  H.  C.,  on 
Hooker,  45. 


Whitney,  Miss  Maria,  letters 
of  Bowles's  to,  279,  281. 

Wilson,  Gen.  James  H.,  his 
Life  of  Dana,  57;  on  Grant 
and  Thomas  at  Chatta- 
nooga, 113. 

Wyeth,  Dr.  John  A.,  With 
Sabre  and  Scalpel  quoted, 
106. 

Young,  John  Russell,  58. 


THE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  SANTA  CRUZ 


This  book  is  due  on  the  last  DATE  stamped  below. 


JAN  2  7  197T 

JAM  2  C  RECt 
MAY  1 7  I 


lOOm-8,'65  (F6282s8)2373 


3  2106  00060  7223 


